Jump to content


Advent Computer Training (Barclays Partner Finance)


HSBCrusher
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2392 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

Please

Start your own new thread

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

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Also I have not as yet written to the FOS so my complaint will be fresh

 

I'd send everything that could possibly prove mis-selling if it were me, 10pack (evidence you were unemployed, why you don't consider CT adequate, 3 month delay before BPF appointed them -anything that illustrates how you've been messed around).

If you don't have end dates on your course agreement then it's worth emphasizing that particularly, bearing in mind someone has already had a favourable result on that point.

When I put mine togethere I sent copies of my agreements (mine do sadly have dates) and correspondence with Barclays, showing how unreasonable they were in looking at my complaint. There's a short guide to the main points on the home page of my website which might help (you can also take legal points/arguments from Hausfeld's various letters on the site too).

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

ok so here's the thing, i've already had a final decision from the F.O.S regarding my complaint about all this and they sided with barclays, so do i contact them again?

or is this now a job solely for the solicitors team?

 

No, I need to make this clear in case people are confused. Hausfeld will not be arguing anyone's case with FOS for them - that is for each individual to do for themselves. If you have NO end date on your course agreement you need to contact your FOS adjudicator now and explain that this new ruling has come to light and request your case is looked at again (by the ombudsman if necessary - look at their website and it explains it all there).

 

Hausfeld are interested though in people's outcomes in case they can use it as leverage, hence I've asked for people to let me know if you get a ruling in your favour (that's how this one came to light).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has there been any further ground being taken on people who unfortunately coughed up the money and have dates on their forms?

 

Not yet, Savarok. I'm in the same position and I think we will have to rely on the mis-selling and not like for like if enough prople can prove that, plus any legal issues such as S75 etc. FOS are accepting not like for like it seems where individuals have no end date on their course agreement (as they cannot deny the course was sold as open-ended there). For those of us who have dates though they are using that as proof our course was not open-ended, even when we argue the sales rep assured us it was 'by arrangement'.

 

One good thing I spotted after plodding through over 90 emails last night in response to this was at least 70 people told me they had no dates entered, so if that sample is anything to go by then it seems reps entering dates was not the norm. I'd assumed it would just be a few people where the rep hadn't bothered to complete the date boxes on the form, but not so.

In which case this number is good evidence the course WAS designed to be open-ended, and perhaps those of us with dates were the exception. My sales rep assured me the dates (2 years, which was up in Dec 2010) were (quote) "just a rough guide" and if I needed more time to contact Advent and negotiate that.

We can then argue that the same policy applied to ALL of, not just individuals who happen to have reps who maybe correctly filled out the forms by leaving them blank. Training for reps may not have been very good as they were obviously inconsistent in filling out the forms and incompetent in some case in advising guarantors particularly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My rep did the same, he said I will put the dates on the form as a guide to work towards but should you need extra time to contact advent directly.

 

I'm happy there has been a breakthrough for some of us though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like its all good news with the fos considering they have been ruling in Barclays favour through most of this.

 

I can't even find my enrolement form, im not sure if i recieved one or not. I have 3 kids and we get a lot of letters so it must have got lost over the years. Funny thing is i still got the agreement with Barclays so you would assume that i would still have the other paperwork

 

I hear that few of you have had the rep come out to you, mine was done all over the phone and post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like its all good news with the fos considering they have been ruling in Barclays favour through most of this.

 

I can't even find my enrolement form, im not sure if i recieved one or not. I have 3 kids and we get a lot of letters so it must have got lost over the years. Funny thing is i still got the agreement with Barclays so you would assume that i would still have the other paperwork

 

I hear that few of you have had the rep come out to you, mine was done all over the phone and post

 

On the back of the Advent enrolment form it clearly says - IF THERE IS NO SIGNATURE FROM AN ADVENT DIRECTOR, THIS IS NOT A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT.

Not much chance of BPF enforcing that contract in court because it is a linked loan, might be worth finding your agreement as a priority.

You signing a finance agreement with BPF, would be based on a legally binding contract with Advent[linked loan]. This is something not to be overlooked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the back of the Advent enrolment form it clearly says - IF THERE IS NO SIGNATURE FROM AN ADVENT DIRECTOR, THIS IS NOT A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT.

Not much chance of BPF enforcing that contract in court because it is a linked loan, might be worth finding your agreement as a priority.

You signing a finance agreement with BPF, would be based on a legally binding contract with Advent[linked loan]. This is something not to be overlooked.

 

I'll take a look at that when I get home, Lowdown - maybe need to query it with Ingrid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll take a look at that when I get home, Lowdown - maybe need to query it with Ingrid.

 

I am not sure why it is there - but must be for a reason, might be nothing but worth checking.

 

See attachment - why are Moorcroft sending out to students 'Pre Court' letters.

BPF would be attempting legal Suicide surely?

Are they not aware of the enrolment forms?

 

Reverse of Enrolment form

[ATTACH=CONFIG]24662[/ATTACH]

Edited by lowdown
attachment added
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's exactly where my confusion is laying. WHY!! are they disregarding the student, I have not been personally informed by BPF but they wrote straight to my Dad and the DCA's have been on at him but he's backing me 100% and can see the injustice of the whole situation. I know it stinks but I'll continue to fight this as Neither my Dad or I are receiving any goods or services. So what have we to be paying for and I will not be railroaded by a bank just for their profits.

 

Bluedo, out of interest, did you raise this with your Trading Standards local office, or Consumer Direct?

Would be interesting to see what they make of your agreements (and anyone else in this guarantor situation).

Link to post
Share on other sites

why are Moorcroft sending out to students 'Pre Court' letters.

I would assume they are stepping up their level of scare tactics in desperation for money from students. I had letters from Mercers giving me 7 days to pay the entire loan. I ignored these and nothing happened. I also sent Mercers and Barclays Partner Finance (sent them so many letters) a Letter disputing the account. Mercers have only called me once since that letter, which I think was a mistake from them because they haven't called back since.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure why it is there - but must be for a reason, might be nothing but worth checking.

 

See attachment - why are Moorcroft sending out to students 'Pre Court' letters.

BPF would be attempting legal Suicide surely?

Are they not aware of the enrolment forms?

 

Reverse of Enrolment form

[ATTACH=CONFIG]24662[/ATTACH]

 

Thanks for that, Lowdown - I'll look further into this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite simply now I have complained twice to the OFT,Trading Standards and BPF about the intimidatory behavior of Barclays and Mercers with this email and letter. Now that I finally have a reference from the FOS. Later this month when they do their next round of D.C.A activity all 3 plus now the FOS will get the same complaint. As Fuzzbut explained get your complaint into the FOS if you have an Enrolment Form with no dates entered most definately.

 

OFT and Trading Standards won't entertain your complaint against a DCA unless you have a complaint into the FOS. They will also inform you to complain to Barclays again (which gets you a new complaint from Barclays) . So this month I suspect I'll be doing another round of these letters also I shall provide evidence that this may also have prevented me from gaining potential employment

 

>

 

Complaint Against: Clydesdale Financial Services Limited t/a Barclays Partner Finance and Mercers Debt Collections Limited

 

Licence No: 0375557/ 0511950

 

I would like to again report Barclays Personal Finance’s breach of s2.6 (h) of the Office of Fair Trading debt collection guidance in so far as they, while the debt is in dispute, have instructed Mercers Debt Collections Ltd for the recovery of the debt.

 

Barclays Personal Finance is fully aware that the debt claimed is in dispute but despite this they have passed the debt to Mercers Debt Collection Ltd for recovery, contrary to the Office of Fair Trading Guidelines.

They are disregarding guidelines in this instance by making threats of legal action against me to recover the money whilst this is in dispute. I have found this behaviour very intimidating.

 

I would like this behaviour to cease until this is settled by the law firms involved and have attached the correspondence as evidence.

 

>

 

Keep up the good work Fuzz if you need a hand/evidence for the miss selling angle or any IT Industry related questions answered from someone who has experience of IT training I will be glad to help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep up the good work Fuzz if you need a hand/evidence for the miss selling angle or any IT Industry related questions answered from someone who has experience of IT training I will be glad to help.

 

Thanks - much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bluedo, out of interest, did you raise this with your Trading Standards local office, or Consumer Direct?

Would be interesting to see what they make of your agreements (and anyone else in this guarantor situation).

 

Hi Fuzz,

I have raised it with consumer direct who said i have to ask Barclays that question think I can guess their reply

(you're still liable likely will be it ) and have been transferred again to TS will update when I get a reply.

 

I think as there are new angles (thanks to yourself and all the others who are posting here) and new additions to our complaints, perhaps initially we were not armed properly before, so will be interesting to see if we perhaps can get a better result. I will choose my wording very carefully this time and will cross my fingers again!!

 

As the Guarantors claims to the fos were disregarded as to the link being broken between student,supplier and finance i think a pop at getting a complaint solely from my Dad as the finance is with him- re all the mis-selling issues and CT differences etc., must hold some water. As a consumer surely my Dad has rights in this situation, and all the guarantors.

Do the FOS only deal with section 75 claims? I would have thought any unfair situation should be dealt with by them.

 

I'm open to any suggestions or ideas anyone has that I can't think of. Thanks :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what the legal term is, but I'm sure that once there is evidence that a number of people's contract is 'open-ended', it can be 'reasonably assumed' that the intention was that ALL contracts were open-ended.

I would like to add my 'thanks' once-again for your hard work Fuzz.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i.ve contacted the adjudicator who handled my case and explained to her what has recently come to light.

she asked me if there was a start date and end date on my forms and when told her that there was'nt she asked me to send the form to her along with the terms and conditions

and she would review the case again!:-)

fingers crossed!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the back of the Advent enrolment form it clearly says - IF THERE IS NO SIGNATURE FROM AN ADVENT DIRECTOR, THIS IS NOT A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT.

Not much chance of BPF enforcing that contract in court because it is a linked loan, might be worth finding your agreement as a priority.

You signing a finance agreement with BPF, would be based on a legally binding contract with Advent[linked loan]. This is something not to be overlooked.

 

The back of the access2 enrolment form, paragraph 2.1:

 

"No contract exists between you and us for the supply of the Services until a completed Enrolment Form has been signed by both you and a person who has the authority to sign the Enrolment Form on our behalf."

 

its signed by me, but not even a space for another signature.

 

 

Also paragraph 10 - Termination

 

" 10.1 Contract will terminate immediately on notice from us to you." ............... is that the notice that they ceased trading?

 

"10.2 In the event that we make any voluntary arrangement with our creditors or become subject to an administration order or go into liquidation......" ........ liquidation

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think as there are new angles (thanks to yourself and all the others who are posting here) and new additions to our complaints, perhaps initially we were not armed properly before, so will be interesting to see if we perhaps can get a better result. I will choose my wording very carefully this time and will cross my fingers again!!

 

As the Guarantors claims to the fos were disregarded as to the link being broken between student,supplier and finance i think a pop at getting a complaint solely from my Dad as the finance is with him- re all the mis-selling issues and CT differences etc., must hold some water. As a consumer surely my Dad has rights in this situation, and all the guarantors.

Do the FOS only deal with section 75 claims? I would have thought any unfair situation should be dealt with by them.

 

I'm open to any suggestions or ideas anyone has that I can't think of. Thanks :-)

 

Good luck with that Bluedo, maybe a good tactic to have your dad put in a complaint (could be a way out for guarantors ). I understood anyone who has had a finance deal with any organisation they aren't happy with are entitled to complain to FOS so don't see why they wouldn't look at it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what the legal term is, but I'm sure that once there is evidence that a number of people's contract is 'open-ended', it can be 'reasonably assumed' that the intention was that ALL contracts were open-ended.

I would like to add my 'thanks' once-again for your hard work Fuzz.

 

You're welcome, Dave.

That's a good point. I've been thinking about this and I'm going to put in another FOS complaint with emphasis on;

  • 'reasonably assumed'- open-ended should apply to all students on similar courses.
  • the lack of directors signature on the AGREEMENT

I can't prove the mis-selling with job placement promise as I don't have this in writing, like the open-ended promise, but it's worth a shot.

Edited by Fuzzbutt
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just re-read a reply from Ingrid and realised I must have raised the director's signature in my last email to her on Tuesday (sorry) -

I asked;

"Someone else also pointed out that the agreements are supposed to be signed by an Advent director so I'll check mine as I hadn't thought about that."

She replied;

"The fact that the agreement is not signed by an Advent Director is a peripheral issue, and won’t really get far."

May be worth a mention though as yet another example of inconsistency in the Advent enrolement form and the style of sign up used by individual reps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys, Looking through all my paperwork I couldn't find my original of my copy of the agreement anywhere! I have copies but not the original. Mustve sent it to Hausfeld by accident.

BPF must be getting worried because the last few weeks they've had Mercers ringing me 3 times everyday. 4 on one day!

Thanks Fuzz for all your hard work!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello All,

 

Just reading through the previous posts and thanks fuzzbutt also for all your hard work, time and patience, this group has been a life line!

 

I am the "guarantor" or loan holder as it appears now and my ex partner was the student who decided against continuing with this also. On receiving the updates regarding those who have received refunds it did pose a question to my mind as I have no recolection at all of my ex receiving any forms to send back to Advent. We still speak regarding this issue and he claims all he received was phone call from Advent, them saying he would need me to be his 'sponsor' and away he goes. When I spoke to Deborah at Advent I dont recall her mentioning anything about him having to sign anything either, esp not of the description as a green form. So I then received the loan form and filled this asap and my ex received the course syllabus and material shortly after.

 

1) Do computeach have any of the old paperwork or phone recordings from these sells?

2) If it def was the case that my ex didnt sign anything, where does this leave me?

 

Any ideas or similar stories?? Am hoping this is going to be an advantageous circumstance rather than another hinderance

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello All,

 

I am the "guarantor" or loan holder esp not of the description as a green form. So I then received the loan form and filled this asap and my ex received the course syllabus and material shortly after.

1) Do computeach have any of the old paperwork or phone recordings from these sells?

2) If it def was the case that my ex didnt sign anything, where does this leave me?

 

Any ideas or similar stories?? Am hoping this is going to be an advantageous circumstance rather than another hinderance

 

It's interesting that so many of us in this "Loan holder"( I like that term as Guarantor wasn't a word that was used when signing up) situation have botched or no paperwork seems only the finance was all they cared about doing properly.

I don't know if CT will have any of these records i doubt it probably only the database of students were given to them but I don't know.

If they can't produce enrolment forms to prove your course wasn't open ended then without the forms I'd imagine we have no end dates one way or the other.

So the mess has to be in their lap to clear up, perhaps why we haven't all been dragged to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting that so many of us in this "Loan holder"( I like that term as Guarantor wasn't a word that was used when signing up) situation have botched or no paperwork seems only the finance was all they cared about doing properly.

I don't know if CT will have any of these records i doubt it probably only the database of students were given to them but I don't know.

If they can't produce enrolment forms to prove your course wasn't open ended then without the forms I'd imagine we have no end dates one way or the other.

So the mess has to be in their lap to clear up, perhaps why we haven't all been dragged to court.

 

 

I also think that advent in the last month or so was saying anything to collect money because they knew they was going to the wall.

For me it was about 4 weeks from when I signed up before advent went bust, and yet somehow they managed to find time to rush my paperwork through to get a loan from Barclays.. how?

if barclays had removed their financing at begining of December 2009.. what sort of time scales are we talking about from when barclays said thats it we will cut you off now? it could not have been days by the look of it.. otherwise if it was weeks barclays would have refused to finance my loan simply because of the time limits.

so by the looks of it it was mere days, and the advent boss wrote that he had tried hard to find alternate finance before going bust.

what happened to all the money that should have been there to pay for our training concidering the banks are saying they gave payment up front.. i really wish we kew what happened there.

someone knows:!:

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...