NatWest OD facility letters

[pj2017]

Thanks Paul, I read that.

 

I haven't had any communication from the bank for 3 weeks now - it's just my account is closed and is not shown online any more. Paypal has emailed me to say that the long-dormant direct debit facility connected to the NatWest account is now defunct - which doesn't matter as I pay for paypal from my Citibank account.

 

But they did tell me on the phone my account was being closed and transferred to the debt recovery arm. I'll post here when I found out what is going on.

[pj2017]

I made a nuisance of myself again by sending another email to RBS group executive office - asking whether my account is going to a router, and whether the debt will be transferred into a loan account without my knowledge and with a secret interest rate! I got this reply today:

 

 

Your accounts have now been passed to our Credit Management Services (CMS)

department and the team will work with you to agree a suitable repayment plan.

Once an account is moved to Collections it is no longer visible via our Online

Banking site, but does remain open while we collect repayments from you. ...

 

I note your concerns regarding what may happen to your account and to put

your mind at rest I can confirm that all interest and charges have been

suspended on your account. The account number and sort code are unchanged, we

have not and will not open a new router account or transfer the debt onto a loan

or apply secretive interest rates.

 

Good to get that in writing!

[Old Cogger]

deleted info obtained.

Edited October 19, 2013 by Old Cogger

[pj2017]

I was pleased to be assured that my account is not going to a router account, and in my email to the RBS executive office, I gave some details of my financial circumstances and made clear my recently increased standing order of £20 a month will remain in place - especially now the executive office reassured me the money will find its way into the account.

 

But today - after CMS has made no effort whatsoever to contact me and made no comment on my £20 a month - I received a letter stating that they have been unable to contact me, and my account collection will now be handled by an outfit called Allied International Credit. I've unplugged my landline today because of that -NatWest don't have my mobile phone number - but having read of the behaviour of that outfit, I've decided to make sure they don't phone me. I will simply carry on paying £20 a month, or overpaying when I have some spare money, to whittle down the debt as I can, but without engaging with AIC.

[AndyOrch]

Welcome to the black hole and the world of CMS:wink:

 

pj2 its vital that yo keep a record of every penny paid....because they wont.

[Guest]

yes, now out to the dca's for their slice!

 

didn't they say no 'new' router account? so, there is one already?

[pj2017]

Well, Ford, if it turns out they have put it in a router account - I will have a letter from RBS to use as the basis for litigation.

 

AIC? It sounds like they will try to go for immediate repayment of the full amount - which is what AIC does - but that is just absurd. I read somewhere on CAG how AIC offered to accept just 50% of someone's debt to close their account - and offered to mark the credit file as "partially settled" - LMAO? PMSL? If they offer to accept part of the debt from me for a "partial settlement" on my file, I will know straightaway that that means the balance will be being pursued by some other DCA - so that's how these mugs play this game.

[Mike_hawk]

CMS relocated to brindley place in Brum about 14 months ago and were joined with what remained of the fraud department... wonder if RBS thought that one through?

 

Router account... Not sure that it creates them anymore. As I understood it, it realised it was capable of utilising NW's historic o/s in creating non interest bearing current account/overdraft facilities for dilinquent accounts.

 

I wouldn't waste any energy on AIC, it doesn't have a great remedy to offer you. Perhaps play RBS at its own game and email it thanking it for agreeing to the arrangement of £xx per month.

[Guest]

 

Router account... Not sure that it creates them anymore. loyds still do them!

 

I wouldn't waste any energy on AIC, it doesn't have a great remedy to offer you. Perhaps play RBS at its own game and email it thanking it for agreeing to the arrangement of £xx per month. ditto. if paying, pay to original creditor only not any dca

 

[pj2017]

Well, I had worried that my account number had been deactivated so I couldn't just carry on paying NatWest, but the answer I got from the Executive Office shows I can carry on using that number - and the money will get there. So I won't respond to AIC

[Mike_hawk]

I'd set up a standing order to your account at an affordable rate and confirm the arrangement by email with Natwest.

 

Add a comment regarding the misleading template correspondence from CMS so that you have a written record of events as they occur.

 

I wouldn't bother saying any more than you need to get the point across.

[pj2017]

I have a Standing Order set up for £20 to pay this NatWest debt - but now Allied International Credit are involved, they want a bit more (£29) - but the thing is they sent me a Standing Order Authority form to fill in. Is there any danger in filling in their Standing Order Authority to replace my existing standing order? does it thereby give them the right to vary the Standing Order as if it were a direct debt mandate? Also, the RBS Group Executive Office told me my existing account number was still live, and so I could pay in to that but AIC want me to pay into their account. Should I do that?

[AndyOrch]

I have a Standing Order set up for £20 to pay this NatWest debt - but now Allied International Credit are involved, they want a bit more (£29) - but the thing is they sent me a Standing Order Authority form to fill in. Is there any danger in filling in their Standing Order Authority to replace my existing standing order? does it thereby give them the right to vary the Standing Order as if it were a direct debt mandate?

 

No replace one with the other and cancel the first

[pj2017]

Andy I'll do that, but since you posted, I changed my original post to indicate they're asking me to pay into an AIC account with a reference number that probably relates to my debt - which means if I agree to their standing order it will go to AIC and not to my existing account. Maybe it makes no difference - but maybe it does and AIC will start charging me as a "customer" of theirs?

[AndyOrch]

Yes I take your point...but as long as you have record and proof of who you are paying...makes no odds...you wont become a customer of theirs they dont have an agreement with you nor do they have a Credit Licence to lend money.

[pj2017]

OK, thanks.

[pj2017]

After setting up a standing order to pay AIC £29 a month in October, I still owe more than £3100, and I have had a couple of letters from them saying "we don't seem to be able to get hold of you" - although I'm wondering why only a few months after starting a repayment facility they are trying to hassle me. Today I received an Early Settlement Offer.

 

It says: "AIC are currently reviewing your file to consider if further action is warranted. At this point, there is an offer on your account that would allow you to settle the outstanding balance with a discounted value. This payment can be made in up to 4 monthly instalments.... On payment of the agreed amount, your credit file would be marked as Partially Satisfied" - or alternative I should phone them to arrange an alternative repayment option (which I thought I already had in place).

 

Does this mean they are offering a lower amount that would clear the whole balance? Or would it only clear part of it, and then be shunted onto for the balance to be reclaimed by someone else? I am wondering how to reply, as the letter does say they are thinking of "further action" only a few weeks after I set up a repayment facility.

 

Any ideas what I should say? They have offered to let me contact them by email and not by phone, and I would do that so there is a record.

[AndyOrch]

" On payment of the agreed amount, your credit file would be marked as Partially Satisfied"

 

Just after more...you have an arrangement...disregard...payments on the drip are no use to these parasites they want big payments hence the offer.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[robcag]

re robcags case, it seems that he did rely as a 'key' on the fact that 'they' said that they could not provide copies of the facility letters that they mentioned in WS even though it was 'standard practice' to send them. that was re a summary judgment application which was refused. and, they later discontinued. but, it seems to have since resurfaced?

 

did you get a copy communications/timeline log to the relevant date? if so, and doesn't show anything, then could use that.

here is robcags thread for reference. as said, it seems that he may have been 'lucky' re the J lottery on this at the time, and it has since dca resurfaced. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?241052-Irwin-Mitchell-NastyWest-overdraft-claim-***-Won-With-Costs***

 

A bit late, but an update to the DCA question;

 

 

I just ignored it and heard nothing further.

 

 

AFAIK (I only check Noddle - i.e. CallCredit), no default was lodged by NW with the CRAs.

Edited December 12, 2014 by robcag
Tried to change layout of answer but not able to.

[Guest]

A bit late, but an update to the DCA question;

 

 

I just ignored it and heard nothing further.

 

 

AFAIK (I only check Noddle - i.e. CallCredit), no default was lodged by NW with the CRAs.

 

thanks for updating rob

did the facility letter request end up keeping them at bay for good?

[robcag]

did the facility letter request end up keeping them at bay for good?

 

Never say never, but all quiet ATM.As you know if you've read my Defence (both SJ and Amended Defence), part of the argument I put forward was that the overdraft came about with the tacit agreement of NW; i.e. by NW allowing me to overdraw on my account from time to time and for me to pay it back, and me gradually increasing the amount borrowed.As I see it, on the 'balance of probabilities' that is a perfectly feasible argument. It seems the judge at the Summary Judgment hearing was willing to weigh that possibility against NWs argument that Facility Letters would have been automatically sent.

[Guest]

Never say never, but all quiet ATM.As you know if you've read my Defence (both SJ and Amended Defence), part of the argument I put forward was that the overdraft came about with the tacit agreement of NW; i.e. by NW allowing me to overdraw on my account from time to time and for me to pay it back, and me gradually increasing the amount borrowed.As I see it, on the 'balance of probabilities' that is a perfectly feasible argument. It seems the judge at the Summary Judgment hearing was willing to weigh that possibility against NWs argument that Facility Letters would have been automatically sent.

 

 

cheers, will revisit yr thread.