Jump to content

vic needs non-urgent help from site team

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4085 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then


Please click the "Report " link


at the bottom of one of the posts.


If you want to post a new story then


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

Hi guys


Basically, this is my first draft, does this make sense in terms of OFT and FOS responsibilities?


And, does it hit the mark the mark? "I emailed you on November 17th via my email account that is registered with you upon receipt of your Final Response dated November 15th. I have not, as yet, received an acknowledgment or reply. This is quite worrying given that you are an Internet bank and that you invited me to reply via email; attached is a hard copy of the email in case your systems may have gone awry.

I have since spoken with both FOS and OFT.

First, FOS: because this is complicated and confused, they have advised me to resolve the complaint with you if at all possible before lodging a formal complaint with them; I am attempting to do that now. They further advise that, were that not to prove possible, I should be specific about the nature of my complaint and provide documentary and transcript evidence.

Second, OFT: they advise that they will not deal with individual complaints and that my ‘report’, which may contain a complaint, should be phrased in terms of an apparent general abuse of business practice that might call into question your continued eligibility to hold a credit licence and that conformance with their guidelines irrespective of recent case law would be a material consideration.

The two are interlinked.

When I wrote to you on October 19th 2010, and telephoned Ms Stepanie (Account Manager) on the same date, I made it clear that my extant complaint was that you had telephoned me at work that ‘had the effect of psychological harassment and acted in a way that is likely to be publically embarrassing to me. Your telephone calls may jeopardise my continued employment and result in significant financial loss.’ I understand that your action was in breach of OFT guidelines and may not, in itself, as an unresolved anecdote, constitute a valid complaint given FOS guidelines. That is why I am trying to resolve this with you now, not withstanding the fact that I accept the authenticity of your Final Response.

Ironically, OFT will not accept the same anecdote of breach of their guidelines as a basis for a valid ‘report’; it needs to be generalized in terms of your business practice. With your help, I shall attempt to formulate that argument now.

We both have the audit trail of correspondence and telephone calls as a patina of authenticity.

So, let’s consider your response in detail:

Our understanding of your complaint


  • Bullet point 1 is disingenuous. I challenged the legibility of your response to one of the accounts.
  • Bullet points 4 and 5 artificially separate two issues that are one. The issue of ‘psychological harassment and acted in a way that is likely to be publically embarrassing to me.’ is solely to do with you calling me on an open office work number.

Our findings from the investigation


  • Bullet point 1: You have provided a legible copy of what was previously illegible. However, in saying that this “…is free of charge as a gesture of goodwill..” implies something about your understanding, practices and competencies.
  • Bullet point 2: I fully accept your point here. I did not express my request for all correspondence to be in writing only in written form but only verbally in numerous conversations with you and your agents. Thank you for providing copies of my previous letters to you.
  • Bullet point 5: The first sentence is welcome temporary psychological relief although the use of the words ‘appeal’ and ‘legitimate reasons’ are curiously quasi-legalistic. The second sentence might be construed as a threat by an ordinary person.

Our decision

Para 4 is disingenuous: when you say that you attempted to contact me on “…no fewer than 28 occasions..” it was certainly a number greater than 28 as your records will show. It is not true that I did not return these calls; certainly I returned fewer than 28 of these calls.

“Egg attempted to contact you using a publically available alternative telephone number.” You imply that at no point did I register that telephone number with you or authorized you to contact me on number that I had not registered; your implication is correct . I cannot see where I agreed to this in any terms and conditions that I signed. To my eyes, this appears to be a breach of UK and EU law in terms of data protection and other matters given that “your telephone calls may jeopardise my continued employment and result in significant financial loss”.

I hope that I have demonstrated to you that my complaints to both OFT and FOS are appropriately formulated to focus on these bodies respective areas of regulatory competence, as they have helpfully advised.

In conclusion, I reiterate my offer which was the substance of my telephone call to Stephanie (Account Manager) referred to above. What I would like to happen is:


  1. You agree to abide by OFT guidelines
  2. We agree to the repayment plan discussed with Stephanie.

I anticipate your reply in writing by delivery by post or email within 5 working days so that we might both reach an amicable agreement."


All advice gratefully received




Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...