Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • If anybody has any advice here, it would be greatly appreciated, I already suffer with pre-existing disabilities & have struggled with this so far. 
    • so return of goods order etc etc read upload  scan pages to jpg, redact in mspaint. the convert to and merge to one mass PDF  read upload and use the online listed sites for all 3 stages. do you want to keep the car? i will guess this was a manual paper claimform direct from the co.court or was it org sent from salford bulk processing and has just got reaq ssigned?      
    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue –  29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM 1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached  2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00. The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month. 3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement, Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us. Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement 9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate 4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:- a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement  number xxxxxx. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     The total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by First class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges 5.  At the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage. Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024  What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg  
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

MBNA PPI Award “Interpretative” Calculations?


AfterMidnight
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2621 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

I wish I had a calculation to argue, MBNA refuse to do anything about my claim.

 

Currently with FOS,

 

SAR request came back with the original application which I ticked no to PPI.

 

It was applied from the outset of the card, the communication sheet starts six months after the card was started so they can't argue they sold it over the phone.

 

thats a different matter,

 

MBNA have used very dodgy tactics on their calculation.

 

It doesn't follow any of the principles set in the FSA document kindly linked to by Ims21.

 

Like Ken100464 says unless there has been a change in guidelines by the FSA, MBNA are on very thin ice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Must be like taking candy off a baby.

 

Yep, if MBNA had sent me the V20C_B031 there is enough errors on it to rip them to shreds without even looking at if they has applied FOS rules.

 

I was looking to see if I could work it backwards and get the interest rates applied to the Card Redress column but it came up to varied to be of use. A lot of odd rates pulled up which made me look at the sheet in more detail.

 

There are at least four instances when the card redress column reduces but there is no increase in the Surplus redress.

 

21.04.08, 21.04.08, 22.09.09, 28.12.09,.

Who ever produced the calc was an amateur:lol:

Edited by Miaspa 2010
change of opinion
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and one final point the card redress balance never moves to the suplus redress once the PPI finishes. This means the card redress balance never attracts any interest as the card is at 0%. That means that the £400ish balnce atrracts no interest for 34 months.

 

So in summary.

 

MBNA haven't applied FOS guidelines.

MBNA applied their own rules but not applied them consistently.

MBNA then haven't applied any duty of care by working out their calculation correctly.

 

Each instant of an error is in their favour, not that of the card holder.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and the most obvious point, but I haven't checked my figures on this the totals on page 1 for the summary don't agree with the PPI paid per the calculations, nor does the associated interest, I'd guess if you totalled up the 8% interest it wouldn't agree either but I can't be bothered to do this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you seem to have most of what we had worked out so I can only hope you get your uphold and then know you need to confront them via this useless calculation they have.

 

Just to let you know MBNA have sent us a final response telling us to do one they are right FSA/FOS are wrong.

 

How arrogant.[edit] back to America ya shysters.

Edited by dx100uk
behave! - dx
Link to post
Share on other sites

hi all

 

got 2 cheques back today from MBNA and following this thread the amounts are lower than the FOSspreadsheet. How do i ask for the statements from MBNA to see how they calculate the amounts.

 

Matthew

 

Write to them and demand them.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mat.

 

Ask for the specific spreadsheet within this thread. Put in your letter FOS deem it something they should do and if you dont get it you will ask FOS to intervene.

 

I now have a letter from these shysters basically saying they dont have to follow either FSA or FOS examples, will pay what they like because I operated the account the way I did so its all my fault. Can you believe they actually used those words. It was my fault.

 

They will explain the 8% instead of contractual as how they see customers actually operate these accounts and therefore the regulators have it wrong. They dont believe overlimits that have been charged on balances that drop below my limit because of the PPI being refunded as anything to do with the claim as they are outside 6 years and the later ones are £12 so FSA deem them to be ok. They just ignore they shouldnt have even been levied in the first place and thats what FSA/FOS deem returning the customer back to where they would be if the PPI hadnt been sold.

 

Never read such an arrogant letter in my life.

 

This lot are really getting me mad. How come the rest can be trying to follow the FSA/FOS guidelines on redress and these muppets feel its ok to tell you they are following the guidelines (letters a regulator would read on a compliance visit) but then just say they will pay what they please to the punter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike.

 

Can you advise if it is worth writing to the FSA just on the off chance they will start to look closely at this lot?

 

I know FSA dont like individuals complaining but this seems so far out of what they should be doing and I presume they are thinking it wont matter if they skoot the UK market.

 

It is a very complex set of calculations and I think an adjudicator off the street in FOS would be totally lost with it. But you can see from the number on here with these spreadsheets that something is indeed going on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All FSA would state = not look into individual cases but will file with any other cases on this subject (means need a lot of people to complain) as I see it, but why not in time may take some action? that has been what others have stated after they complained, also referred to the FOS by FSA as not really their area.

:mad2::-x:jaw::sad:
Link to post
Share on other sites

the fsa made NO ruling on if/if not £12 fees on credit cards were lawful or not

 

it was only for bank charges.

 

Dear Mr. Hoang,

Thank you for your prompt response to my letter of 13th October 2010.Your letter indicates you believe your charges are in line with the Office of Fair Trading Guidelines. In order to make it clear to you that OFT did not give you permission to charge £12.00 I include these quotes from OFT “We are not suggesting that default fees should be set at £12, and a court will certainly not consider that a default fee is fair just because it is below the threshold”. “We consider that a contract term is likely to be unfair if it requires consumers to pay more as a result of a default than the court would order them to pay if they were sued for breach of contract. This means that a default charge should not exceed a reasonable pre-estimate of the administrative costs that the consumer ought to have realized would be likely to be incurred by his or her card issuer in dealing with defaults”.

In order for you to charge me £12.00 you must demonstrate to me that it cost Capital One £12.00 by you receiving my payment two days late.

I was only requesting that you to return all charges to my account that reflects negative balance on my account, however as you have pointed out in your letter to me of 8th December 2010, you have charged me £20.00 many times and occasions.

English Law is very clear the House of Lords held that a contractual party can only recover damages for actual or liquidated losses incurred from a breach of contract. Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motor Co Ltd. I now require you to repay all my charges in total of £676.00 including 8% interest £338.99 of total sum 1,014.99 to my account within 7 days.

Failure to comply will result in court proceedings being initiated,and let the Court decide if the charges are in proportion to actual costs in addressing any breach of terms and conditions/and or loss.

Court action will also include a claim for costs and section 69 interest at the Courts discretion.

In the absence that you can furnish me with figures which represent a true fee/charge that is not undue enrichment,I will be asking the Court to order your disclosure of the same.

In consideration of any charges which you consider outside Limitation,I will be seeking to rely on section 32c of the limitation act 1980 citing the precedent between Kleinwort Benson v Lincoln City Council.

This has been widely accepted by County Courts in recent years.

I trust this outlines and clarifies my position

Yours Sincerely

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ken,

 

i spoke to a firm today and basically i was advised to do the following as these guys have got a full redress back of MBNA.

 

I spoke to the PPI department requesting the calculations and an explanation as to their workings

 

I have also written a letter, recorded post, stating that the settlement is accepted in part payment until the final workings are agreed. i have also included the 2 pages from the FSA guideline stating that i assume the redress is carried out in exactly the same way they have been told to.

 

i have also stated that if the workings are deemed to be incorrect i will hold them in breech of their contractual settlement and chase the extra through the FOS and FSA.

 

the firm i spoke to said it can take a while but they usually pay up.

 

its about time this was mentioned to the national press.

 

once i have my redress statements i will post up and see where i go to from there. i also want to see the calculation sheet so i can run it through the FOS spreadsheet.

 

if anyone else has any further news i would be good to be kept upto date

 

Matt

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Aftermidnight.

 

Any further news from your end.

 

Anyone else reading this

 

FSA have been informed and are really interested in them not calculating as they have been told to do. (Within the FSA guidelines and FOS examples. All publicly viewable) If you havnt got a complaint in to the regulator get one in. They wont help you individually but for the greater good its worthwhile. They did say that if lots of complaints come in they would investigate.

 

Our MP is now involved so again another avenue for you.

 

Mine is now with FOS after MBNA tried to timebarr me using the initial PPI complaint as the starting date. (utter scumbags) FOS have accepted the complaint so that £850 off them.

 

This bank wriggles like no tomorrow. Glad they are leaving our shores. You wont be missed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ken

 

I am still waiting for the full break down of the calculation to arrive, i have telephoned them and sent letters that have been signed for to show that they are in receipt on them but still nothing is forthcoming.

 

I have following the spreadsheet and on 1 card i am in the region of £7,000 shy of what should have been returned to me.

 

I have just requested that they email me them.

 

i have called the FOS and apparently i have to wait 10 weeks from the point that the FOS said that they should pay up until i can lodge another complaint.

 

may i ask if the FSA were interested or the FOS in your dealings.

 

as soon as i have the spread sheets im gonna post on here to see what everyone thinks but im guessing that they have been calculated just some kind of voodoo magic.

 

Matthew

Link to post
Share on other sites

Matt.

 

FSA not FOS. My complaint just gone into FOS so nothing from them.

 

FSA said as is their want that they wont reply to individual complaints but if the background noise starts to part and the same complaint about the same company keeps coming up they will be having a look see.

 

So an email to FSA would be good if you have proof that they are shortchanging you on FSA/FOS guidelines. These are explicit in what the company should be doing.

 

The spreadsheet already flagged up on here is doing nothing of the sorts. As you say they are underchanging punters by at least half. I am not sure why many more arent picking this up

 

Not sure about voodoo magic its certainly some black arts they employ to get away short changing again after being caught with their fingers in the cookie tin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ken / (Matt)

 

Following from hearing, Ken, of your own subsequent reply a number of posts back, from our friends at MBNA, to our very similar situations, I have had since then, on my to do list, getting my FOS submission off and away. Funnily enough I sat down to do this finally tonight, something I had been putting off due to the complexity of making sure my arguement was utterly comprehensive and convincing. I did send MBNA one "oy!" communication directly after receiving the breakdown, and heard nothing back. I guess I have been suffering from procrastination owing to the complexity of assuring myself I am proving it all convincingly to your average FOS initial case worker. ...And trying to work out exactly what the bankers are up to with their method, so I can point this out myself comprehensively to a previously uninvolved person.

 

So - I will send off both FOS and FSA communications in much the same way you have, FOS one may not be as perfect as I would like. I know that they do not neccessarily expect the complainant to be knowledegable and guide the way, but experience from a previous FOS case (for something else) showed me that the adjudicator was more interested in closing and filing the case in a simple way, than neccessarily understanding all the points raised. At first anyway, until I suggested re-looking after an initial decision, which then resulted in a compromise success. May be a while before the FOS get around to looking at the case, I should be OK within the six months limit for a while yet...but will submit it now.

 

Will e-mail FSA too as said (presumably contact email easy enough to find on their site) to aim to add one more voice to the groundswell.

 

Will let you know of any movement, and hope goes well for everyone else too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aftermidnight.

 

Be careful on your timings.

 

Despite me thinking its a seperate issue. They accept the PPI was miss sold, its the redress thats wrong. They let me believe they are looking at the second aspect waste time then in the last correspondence point out the time runs from offer which they then state was the final response. Not from when they decide the second issue has reached impasse

 

For me they then state the 6 months runs from then and even name a date upon which they would argue its time barred to FOS.

 

For them to be using that as a tactic indicates they are starting to feel heat. If they were so sure they wouldnt be trying to artificially manipulate time barring because they would be confident.

 

Like I said at the start my case keeps taking FOS back to the publically viewable FSA guidelines and FOS examples. MBNA are not doing either.

 

Yes FSA have an email on website.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

hello

 

i have an update, its only taken a month but its a update

 

i have today, received the redress calculation results from MBNA and firstly there are a couple of interesting notes, one was carried out on the 8th december when it should have been and the other was carried out on the 8th July when i made my complaint to MBNA. which they rejected.

 

They have used 2 different builds to calculate one is V20_B022 and one is V20C_B031. i am going to post onto here tomorrow once i have PDF'd the two documents.

 

both sheets have errors in but one the associated interest is deffinitely building up and one keeps getting knocked down.

 

Ken do you have a contact at the FSA who you complained to and ill send the same complaint to the same person, failing that what was the address that you used to lodge a complaint to.

 

I some one can go through the figures as well and advise ill keep you all posted

 

Matthew

Link to post
Share on other sites

[email protected] or [email protected]

 

They wont answer your complaint direct but will respond to say they have got it.

 

If you have two builds (which if giving different answers??????) then advise FSA of what you have to guide them.

 

I certainly only have the one build so unless they are saying one supercedes the other having two looks dodgy. You wouldnt spend time and effort creating two programs to achieve the same purpose unless there was something in it for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My build is V20C_B031. Was run in late summer 2012.

 

I believe aftermidnights was the same and his was run within a couple of weeks of mine.

 

Would be very interested when your V20_B022 was run and if it bears any resembalance to the other one

Link to post
Share on other sites

My own was V20C_BO31 as Ken mentions, and I would be very interested in differences between versions too. Makes you wonder if they are evolutions of each other, or if there is a wall somewhere with a big flowchart that states if the customer's account ever occasionally clears, use this worksheet / alternatively under these diifferent parameters, use this other one. If so, then using different criteria, or applying inconsistently to suit is something of a no-no I understand. But the walls of MBNA Towers are very deliberately opaque....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...