Advent Computer Training (Barclays Partner Finance)

[Raymondo955]

Hi Blade 325

 

You can my wife from S****horpe to this list. Indeed I have just written again to FOS with reference to his previous decision and I named the woman who did the mis-selling. Amamda Norcott

[blade325]

Cheers Raymondo, by the end of the week I wil be putting a letter together for the ombudsman, I have now finished with the FOS adjudicators and am now waiting for an Ombudsman. Once the letter is drafted I will write a post here for names of people that where also mis-sold (Location of study) their Advent course by their sales people.

[Raymondo955]

Hi Ya Blade, the case I took to the Ombudsman was on behalf of my wife who was asked to be the Guarantor for our son and as soon as Advent went bust Barclays told her they do not accept guarantors. I am just writing to FOS to request that the case is reopened.

[Raymondo955]

Hi Ya Blade once again my experience of FOS the ombudsman will send you exactly the same reply as the adjudicators have already done, also their use of Section 75 is very questionable for in the case of miss selling they do not seem to understand that even though you miss sold the product this still leaves you as the consumer, they will rule the opposite.

[Fuzzbutt]

Hi Ya Blade once again my experience of FOS the ombudsman will send you exactly the same reply as the adjudicators have already done, also their use of Section 75 is very questionable for in the case of miss selling they do not seem to understand that even though you miss sold the product this still leaves you as the consumer, they will rule the opposite.

 

Yes, I had an almost word for word copy reply from the senior ombudsman, who seemed to just echo what the adjudicator Megan Webster had written. I really don't believe FOS are competent to rule in many cases and the knowledge and legal experience of many of their adjudicators varies so much it's pot luck who you get.

One FOS adjudicator has ruled however that a PPI student was mis-sold the course and ordered Barclays refund her.http://adventstudents.webs.com/apps/blog/entries/show/8935879-fos-rules-in-favour-of-ppl-student

[Raymondo955]

Hi Ya I read that about the PPI, the one thing about this and and FUZZBUTT's forthcoming court hearing is that what we all need is for one case to win and a ruling by the FOS or court could turn everything into our favour, my wife's Union solicitor feels very confident about her case for it is her who has intimated that one in favour of Advent students, she is also the one who suggested that we take our back to FOS and remind them of Section 75 in respect of my wife for because of Amanda Norcott my wife was a consumer from Advent, which she was not as well as from Barclays.

 

Raymondo

[blade325]

Hey Fuzzbutt thanks for the link, having read through it I decided to to check some old documents that I have from the Advents salesman and on it he had written how much I would be earning once I passed the MCDST. Now I intend to present this to the Ombudsman and if he does not do anything with, then the courts. I also have a letter with his writting on it, so if push comes to shove I will get a hand writting expert to verify it.

[DaveH24]

Fuzzbutt is your court hearing either today or tomorrow?

 

If so keep us posted and I wish you the best of luck.

 

Remember keep calm and stick to the facts.

[blade325]

Good luck Fuzzbutt may common sense finally prevail.

[Raymondo955]

Hi Ya Fuzzbutt may I also wish you good luck

[Fuzzbutt]

Report back - well, I gave it my best shot, guys. Got in 1hr ago. To be honest it was pretty daunting and I felt a little out of my depth at times. I think I underestimated the situation as it was a court room situation.

 

Still no verdict though as the judge wanted to study all the material in detail which is a good thing I suppose. BPF sent their 'big guns' from London, 3 members of their legal team and Jonathan Orritt himself (HA HA - guess I should be flattered!)

 

BPF played on the fact I claimed mis-selling but had not raised a complaint at the time with Advent, then that I had insisted on a refund before I knew CT had been the replacement. This, they said, was proof that I had no intention of finishing a course, whoever they found as a replacement. Therefore I had 'buyers remorse' -crafty move. I retaliated with I had no confidence in Barclays finding a decent replacement and had understood that S75 covered us in that Barclays had to refund us automatically when Advent went down. Also raised my evidence that CT was a poor replacement but the judge said my quoting comments from CAG and FB forums was not relevant, only my own experience. I raised the class action, that many others had the same experience of false promises, that CT were slagged off by current customers and had been taken to Dudley Trading Standards for poor service, out of date material and unachievable exam goals - again, I had loads of quotes from various forums but as this was not MY evidence/experience it was very wobbly.

 

The judge, to be fair, challenged a lot of what their solicitor said and cut him short more than once and asked him to qualify his comment. When he claimed 'buyers remorse' nonsense and stated I had proven that I'd had no intention of completiing any course I burst out that BPFs accusations were just supposition and presumption. The judge agreed.

 

I did my best and in my sum up said why did BPF think it was 'fair and reasonable' that they forced Computeach onto me? I cited the LACORS doc and that BPF had no legal right to enforce this company onto me.

 

BPF offered me a deal outside court. The judge asked all parties to take 5 mins to discuss in a recess. The best they had was I could finish my course with CT and I'd never have to pay any more money (goal posts moved again!).

Umm - I didn't want CT in the first pace.

[Kraken1]

no verdict though as the judge wanted to study all the material in detail

 

This is very unusual for the small claims track. When will you get a judgement? If it is deferred you may also get some decent reasoning rather than a simple 'team a wins. bye'

[Fuzzbutt]

Report back - well, I gave it my best shot, guys. Got in 1hr ago. To be honest it was pretty daunting and I felt a little out of my depth at times. I think I underestimated the situation as it was a court room situation.

 

Still no verdict though as the judge wanted to study all the material in detail which is a good thing I suppose. BPF sent their 'big guns' from London, 3 members of their legal team and Jonathan Orritt himself (HA HA - guess I should be flattered!)

 

BPF played on the fact I claimed mis-selling but had not raised a complaint at the time with Advent, then that I had insisted on a refund before I knew CT had been the replacement. This, they said, was proof that I had no intention of finishing a course, whoever they found as a replacement. Therefore I had 'buyers remorse' -crafty move. I retaliated with I had no confidence in Barclays finding a decent replacement and had understood that S75 covered us in that Barclays had to refund us automatically when Advent went down. Also raised my evidence that CT was a poor replacement but the judge said my quoting comments from CAG and FB forums was not relevant, only my own experience. I raised the class action, that many others had the same experience of false promises, that CT were slagged off by current customers and had been taken to Dudley Trading Standards for poor service, out of date material and unachievable exam goals - again, I had loads of quotes from various forums but as this was not MY evidence/experience it was very wobbly.

 

The judge, to be fair, challenged a lot of what their solicitor said and cut him short more than once and asked him to qualify his comment. When he claimed 'buyers remorse' nonsense and stated I had proven that I'd had no intention of completiing any course I burst out that BPFs accusations were just supposition and presumption. The judge agreed.

 

I did my best and in my sum up said why did BPF think it was 'fair and reasonable' that they forced Computeach onto me? I cited the LACORS doc and that BPF had no legal right to enforce this company onto me.

 

BPF offered me a deal outside court. The judge asked all parties to take 5 mins to discuss in a recess. The best they had was I could finish my course with CT and I'd never have to pay any more money (goal posts moved again!).

Umm - I didn't want CT in the first pace.

[Fuzzbutt]

This is very unusual for the small claims track. When will you get a judgement? If it is deferred you may also get some decent reasoning rather than a simple 'team a wins. bye'

 

I don't know, Kraken.Judge said he will write to me and BPF. I'm waiting to hear.

[Keith_rb]

Dammit the suspense is killing me!!

[Bluedo]

Hi Fuzz, Good for you Hopefully the judge will see exactly what's going on here. You have been brilliant and whatever happens you tried your best and I for one am grateful for everything you've done.

I read here that as you are defending yourself the court is more considerate . Hopefully the outcome will be in your favour. Boy bet you're exhausted. Will you just get the outcome sent to you? and that'll be the end of it?

Have a good rest you've earned it :

[Bluedo]

double post

Edited February 6, 2012 by Bluedo
double post

[Raymondo955]

Cases where I have represented other people in debt cases such as rent arrears the judges have been known to delay judgement for various reasons, so there is still hope!

[DonnieB]

Dude, You're super brave Fuzzbutt. If i'd been confronted with 3 lawyers and stuff i'd have probably wet myself. Well done on seeing it through. Whatever happens you've helped out a lot of people over this and I for one am very grateful for all your time and investigations and everything. Here's hoping you still get the answer you (we!!) need.

[Fuzzbutt]

Thanks guys - I really appreciate your supportive words.

 

Hopefully I'll know by end of the week. The judge did speak of a telephone conference option with BPF in London when he's reached a verdict.

 

I mentioned the LACORS doc and included it in my evidence pack. I got a chance to question Mr Orritt in court as he was dragged up as Barclays witness and when I challenged him why did he think Barclays had the right to enforce CT he couldn't answer. Judge would have noted that I hope as he remarked 'that is exactly what I have to decide on now'. The lawyer, Mr Duffy, was pretty smug but all he had on me really was a claim of 'buyers remorse' and a lot of supposition.

 

I felt I didn't get a chance to make a lot of my points strongly enough as the lawyer kept going back to the supposed 'bespoke' issue, which I pointed out I knew nothing of and CT refused to give me anything in writing when I called, no terms and conditions or course breakdown etc - which Ingrid at Hausfeld had said we should at least have before signing up. He kept clutching at straws he could not prove so I think they were rattled. He couldn't look me in the face at one point.

 

Fingers crossed, eh?

[blade325]

Well done Fuzzbutt you have been an inspiration to us all. Regardless of the judges decision I will be filing court papers around April. Im sure BPF have already got their letters about taking us all to court already typed up, but that will not be stopping me. The use of the term 'Buyers Remorse' is a complete insult to all consumers, and the laws that govern consumers choice. They are making a complete mockery of Section 75.

[blade325]

Just wandering that since BPF were able to bring a witness would that also apply to us? and if it does it might be the way to approach any future cases against BPF in future. We could ask ex Computeach students to be witnesses for us.

[Fuzzbutt]

Well done Fuzzbutt you have been an inspiration to us all. Regardless of the judges decision I will be filing court papers around April. Im sure BPF have already got their letters about taking us all to court already typed up, but that will not be stopping me. The use of the term 'Buyers Remorse' is a complete insult to all consumers, and the laws that govern consumers choice. They are making a complete mockery of Section 75.

 

Thanks, Blade - and yes, I agree, Barclays are making a complete mockery of S75 and insulting their own customers.

 

I think the last offer at court by them (upping the offer from just 'we will arrange with CT you can take as long as you like' to 'and not pay any more at all' shows how desperate they were that a judge does not make a ruling on this as they KNOW they are on shaky ground. I'm sure it was not made as a 'gesture of goodwill' but a panic not to let this go further.

[blade325]

They have been on shaky ground from the very beginning. Had they done the morally right thing as opposed to the corporate greed one, then everyone here would have had the choice to carry on or leave without the near two years of aggrevation. In my case I will definetly be calling a fingerprint expert as witness.

[Bluedo]

. I got a chance to question Mr Orritt in court as he was dragged up as Barclays witness and when I challenged him why did he think Barclays had the right to enforce CT he couldn't answer. Judge would have noted that

 

He would normally have answered that with honouring s75 that's been their warcry but couldn't do that spin in a court so shows the rubbish they been telling us.The bespoke is a smokescreen they invented and are hiding behind I hope it gets blown away. They wanted all us to sign up to a company blindly without any thought or consideration just obey them shut up and pay up sussed that out at the start.

 

I will be very surprised if this goes against you Fuzz as if it had been straightforward you'd probably have been told there and then I imagine. Hope you get your good news soon this has been a long haul.

When this started BRW here advised we get a folder and keep every letter and send any letters recorded delivery and he said 6 months from now it would be useful if we went to court, WELL I thought WHAT? 6months I thought it'll be sorted out in a couple weeks haha was I wrong!! 2years later we are still here and if they raise the small claims threshold to £15.000 I might be able to do something but until they do that I'm stuck in limbo.or I'll just ignore them for 3 or 4 more years.