Cap1 & CCA return

[elizabeth1]

Emma

 

who are SLC?

 

Z

 

 

SLC = Student Loans Company?? or at least I think so!!

[elizabeth1]

This is very interesting as I lodged a compliant with them about a month ago and they wrote and said they would take up my case. Then a few days ago I got another letter explaining that they had still not been able to allocate it to a case worker but will be doing so within the next couple of weeks.

I have no doubt that they are exceptionally busy but after April 7th every complaint will mean a £450 fine against the bank/CCP wether founded or not. So are they getting ready to hit the banks where it hurts in exchange for all of this consumer backlash. I really do hope so.

 

 

Me has a stock pile of complaints - ready to send on that date - might post a tad early to make sure I get to top of piles!!!!

[elizabeth1]

I feel sorry for these bank employees - they aren't given the training they need.

 

And the banks themselves don't know what they are talking about anyway....

 

 

I totally agree - these companies had spent years minimising training and even the staff who were lucky enough to gain some training found it was "CBT" Computer Based Training - and they simply learnt to work from "flowcharts"

 

BUT as we see now CAG when members are getting in touch with companies - we simply don't fit a "flowchart" with our queries hence the nonsense we are all repeatedly getting back from these companies :?

 

Even the Supervisors haven't a clue in dealing with us - because their training was rubbish too?

 

Seems like an awful lot of these companies do need to spend some time and money training their staff - cause they sure aren't progressing with this Bank Charges stuff at all.

[elizabeth1]

I know, what amazes me though is that most people that work in a bank don't even have to be authorised by the FSA.

 

I think that anyone taking a job in the financial services industry should have to be authorised by them and anyone working for a consumer credit license holder whould have to do some exams to make sure they understand the act and its principles.....

 

That would make sure that the companies actually invevsted properly in their staff..

 

While the hierachy in these industries see their "staffing" as a "liability" rather than the sound investment that they are - this mess will continue and their staffing will remain "uneducated" for the roles they are doing!!

 

It's because of this "outlook" within these companies that this whole mess across these companies exists!!

 

These companies failed to recognise the "changes" and remained static with their methods of training etc.. within their companies - the whole thing has left them snowed under and it has snowballed into a bigger problem that we see today?

 

They need to change their attitudes and treat their staff as the sound "investments" that they are and train and educate these people to play their roles more efficiently - success will arise from that ??

 

Dinosaur attitudes won't solve anything!!!!

[elizabeth1]

Not only Dinosaur attitudes - it's about greed as well - the more they can save on staff training, the more they cacn line their pockets with!!

 

 

Things do need to change - profits won't solve anything while these companies are so content looking backwards?

 

Training and education of these staff is going to be a key factor in these companies moving forwards and the sooner they recognise this as a fact - the better?

 

Staff are any companies key investment - such a shame they are viewed as a liabilty??

 

I never understood when I was learning accounting etc.. why staff/wages/training costs etc.. came into balance sheets as a liability etc..

It was always something that made me "think" - my own view was that if staff were trained well and as a result performed better etc.. surely that was an asset?? My lecturer used to send me for coffee!!! cause my questions used to be a "spanner in works" :-D I always wondered how the balance sheets would look if we swapped things around a little tad

 

But hey!! who am I to argue with the powers that be?? I guess I am an educationalist at heart?

[elizabeth1]

Oooh, now we are straying into a subject I know something about. The problem with staff as an asset is that you can't trade it ie buy and sell it. It's more intangible than an intangible that you can allegedly buy and sell (albeit only at a price in excess of the total net worth of the assets less liabilities). That needs a willing buyer and seller and I suppose there is an ethical view about owning staff as an asset!

 

However the flaw in accounting standards is that they fail to take account of this 'asset' so an entity is effectively encouraged to cut costs by reducing salaries and wages to give a short term increase in share values. However there is a long term effect that is not so apparant until as someone has pointed out, the assets that workforce serves whether it be goodwill or something more tangible, become devalued by the inability of the workforce.

 

I suspect until Mr Tweedie who oversees the accounting standards committee changes the attitude of the professionals there will be no change in the treatment. No one seems to recognise the problem. Gone are the days of altruism that gave rise to Bourneville. It is no longer commercially acceptable. Companies bleat on about the short-termism of the markets but they all pander to it and then the directors expect a share bonus as well! Double standards methinks.

 

Right, I am now stepping down off my soapbox and back into my cupboard. Sorry to rant folks.

 

I read and studied so much on this stuff years ago with my studies and got myself into a few scrapes!!

 

My idealisms aren't so nutty really - just so many arguments surround the issues? I recognise that changes need to happen.

 

Peter - It's not a "girl thing" really - some of my arguments are very well balanced. Who knows this may happen oneday - there have certainly been discussions about this topic for many years by the "bodies that be" - but seems people stick with "old school of thought" = minds stick with what is. Until these minds & bodies begin to recognise that changes can be made and that they need to be made then the old "systems" will continue.

[elizabeth1]

19.4 This is common stance in the Great South Land. This is why we never had bounced cheques or any problems, the bank moved the money around for you. i thought they did the same thing over when I arrived, but found out rather expensively it doesn't happen. I prefer linked accounts. i was checking our bank statements from when we lived in NZ and we paid 25 cents for every cheque we wrote, but we got the first 10 free every month, of course if there was shortfall in your account or it was the day before pay they rang you and let know, so you could hot foot it in and pay some money over the counter, or they would use the link facility from your savings account to cover your cheque if necessary. Easy peasy, but they always phoned you first to see what you wanted to do, the cost? Nada, zilch, zero, it was called customer service. i emailed our bank manager in Bulls, yes that is place and he said the costs for the cheques have risen slightly to 30 cents for each cheque written, and they still use the link service for free..the bank is WESTPAC, which used to be the Bank of New South Wales (state owned)

 

 

There is a vast amount our Banks could learn from studying what happens in other countries ?? Instead we have had these greedy "sub prime lenders & banks" come here to promote greed and poor customer services - our banking is just geting worse in the UK? Things really need a shake up?

[elizabeth1]

The issue here is that the company who pays for the training will not get the benefit of the training, as another company will come along and offer the people with the training more money to work for them so they don't have to pay for the training themselves. This happens in every walk of life, how many foreign nurses do we have in our hospitals?

 

It is a fact of life and no amount of idealistic leanings will change it, unfortunately

 

(I've just read that and it sounds harsh, it's not meant to....)

 

 

I know exactly what you are saying - I guess I do agree with your point as it's true to some extent!!

 

I guess I'd just like a magic wand to sprinkle my fairy dust over everything and put it right? I see what needs to change and it's so much bigger than I can do !!

[elizabeth1]

Isn't that lovely to see people winning!!

 

CAG is a wonderful place for seeing people win and get back what was theirs!!

[elizabeth1]

What if a bank tells u to close your account after u get sent an agreement with no prescribed terms? You think the FOS will fine them?

 

 

YES !!! Send FOS your complaint and get it looked at etc.. as FOS are giving fines to these companies!!

[elizabeth1]

LB: You are not allowed to give up as it is not in your T&C.Im single,available and happy but am I giving up you bet I aint. Them sl-gs will have to put me in a box before that happens and the chances of them doing that are nil.So have a few bottles of wine a few packs of Marlboro and get yer arse back on here.The "witches" would never forgive you if you left the coven.

 

The Terminator has spoken

 

LB This is good advice by Terminator - don't give up now - I am sure we can all muddle through this stuff together ?? Hey we are doing way better than these Banks and Card companies - at least we are fighting with integrity and never had to lie and cheat to pretend we have power? WE DO HAVE POWER !! we just need to work together to crush these companies for their wrong doing? But we can do it together!!

[elizabeth1]

BA - this hearing sure will be interesting!!!

 

Ian - I bet you can't wait for their next letter!!! Nice for us to wrap them in circles isn't it? you "spot of bother" today made me laugh!!

[elizabeth1]

A lot of work has to be done yet regarding the Human Rights Act and Harassment. this is one of my projects I have been gathering information on to see if we can use parts of the Act hand in hand with the Harassment Laws and CCA. It wont benefit us, but it could help those who come after us and I am sure the Human Rights Act can be used when dealing with the Credit Reference Agencies and our credit files. Once we get Section 85 sorted, this could be the way forward to tighten up our defences.

 

 

I often wonder whether there are laws that touch this topic area to do with "Corporate and Social Responsibilty" where these companies ought to be taking responsibility for their actions etc.. Surely what they are doing is irrisponsible in so many of the areas we are all touching upon within our cases?

[elizabeth1]

Hi Lizzie

 

Don't the banks have an ACOP.

 

 

Seems they rarely "adhere" to anything though??

[elizabeth1]

Good God, that old chestnut again........and you've got me mentioning food items now!! Hussy!!!

 

Did someone mention food?? I am all ears!!

[elizabeth1]

off thread topic

 

 

OK - sorry - sorry - sorry - won't do it again!!

 

I promise to behave now!!!

[elizabeth1]

There is also the ICO to send complaints to and the FOS - SOONER OR LATER THESE COMPANIES ARE GOING TO HAVE TO STOP DOING THIS HORRIBLE STUFF and start treating their customers like Human beings!!!

[elizabeth1]

Perseus - this is an application form - not a CCA at all

STUFF MISSING IS = (I already had an answer to this thanks Pam!!)

1) The creditor's address is not shown

2) the line 'Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974'

is meant to be a heading - shown prominently, not at the bottom of the page

3) The credit limit or how it is to be determined is not shown

4) A statement of how the rate of repayments is to be worked out is not

shown

5) The APR and how/when it may be varied is not shown

6) A statutory statement about the limit of liability for loss or misuse

of the credit card is not present

7) A statutory statement about the possibility of being able to claim

for faulty goods etc from either the trader or the credit card issuer as

per CCA s75 is not present.

[elizabeth1]

Good luck Perseus ;-)

 

You might want to see my thread (spiritgirl -v- various DCAs) and have a read (and a smile) at the conversation I had today, as it was actually with Capital One!

 

Thank you from me to Elizabeth and Peter for their very helpful advice on this thread - its very useful to me too x

 

Spiritgirl x

 

Spiritgirl,

 

I just had the info to hand as another board member had helped me previously etc.. - that agreement was the same as mione so same stuff would apply etc..

 

I shall come and look for your thread - CAP1 are hilarious!! I haven't had so much fun in ages as watching this company talk so much rubbish - they need to admit they are wrong and stop abusing the court system - they know they'll never appear in court and tell a Judge why they are doing the stuff they are doing :grin:

[elizabeth1]

Which bank is this with

 

 

Brilliant!!!

[elizabeth1]

Main, I am about to go into battle with Goldfish/Morgan Stanley. You'll like this people.......I asked for a true copy of my executed agreement (from 1992) and I have taken delivery of.......over the last week :

 

243, YES TWO HUNDRED AND FORTY THREE, copies of a conjectured agreement - current address, current credit limit, current charges, no sig boxes, no sigs and each and every one sequentially numbered.

 

I did post on Addabet's thread, he doesn't know about this update!! LOL!

 

Sorting Office have told me I will have to collect if it continues, I think it is winding down as I only got 40 in this morning's post!!!

 

I thought you were only supposed to have one???!!!!

 

 

THAT IS FUNNY!!! I bet your postman loves delivering your mail?

[elizabeth1]

Waheeeey just received a cheque for my sec 85 claim. Post details later.

 

Paul

Hey well done!!! Nice to see that won!!!

[elizabeth1]

 

 

T'is fraud me dear and also an apparant attempt to obtain a pecuniary advantage by deception through production of a fraudulent instrument...................maybe a visit to the local rozzers would be in order??

 

 

I couldn't agree more!! Seems to be the pattern with many documents that are being issued !!

 

We'd be in big trouble if we did this as individuals - makes me wonder how these comapnies are getting away with it on such a large scale? It is fraud and meddling with Docs isn't what these companies ought to be doing?

[elizabeth1]

Hi i just phoned Consumer Direct about this and they said it is an agreement because it says on it credit agreement requlated by the consumer credit act 1974, and that the leaflet they sent me is also part of the agreement with the terms and conditions on it. They said that it is they application and agreement on the one form which is legal looks like im screwed then ill just have to go down they other road and claim back the charges on it.

 

 

Caigey - do Consumer Direct have a copy of this faxed or emailed/scanned to be saying this ?

 

This document is clearly headed "Application" - this is confusing?

[elizabeth1]

If you want to see an ultra short (crap) agreement have a look at mine

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-763464.html

 

and thats all I got

 

 

Looks like they in bother?