Inportant info required

[John 1963]

have any of you who have a complaint against Swift contacted your MP about them?

 

If so could you please post up here the details of the MP concerned as a lobby group of MP's is trying to be established to try and help Swift customers. The importance cannot be stressed enough, obviously the more MP's involved the more the right people will take notice.

[determindator]

have any of you who have a complaint against Swift contacted your MP about them?

 

If so could you please post up here the details of the MP concerned as a lobby group of MP's is trying to be established to try and help Swift customers. The importance cannot be stressed enough, obviously the more MP's involved the more the right people will take notice.

 

I will pass this info on as I know others have contacted their MP's. Thanks for your post.

[determindator]

To start Vince Cable, Stella Creasy, Chris Leslie, Mark Hoban.

Edited June 20, 2013 by determindator

[John 1963]

thanks for that but people please keep them coming this is very important. If we could find 60 you are looking at nearly 10% of the entire commons and that would make them take notice. Even if you have not contacted your MP yet about Swift think about doing so as it will not do your fight any harm.

[Peterbard]

Just thought I would bump this , has there been any development here ?

[John 1963]

I contacted mine but she wasn't helpful. I think the total that did write was in single figures, with that response no one is going to take any interest. Swift have got a license to carry on as they wish.

[determindator]

I'd like to think there is work going on to put a stop to this toxic lending, not fit for society. Please all, send your complaints to the FOS. They are very aware of Swift. Make them more aware.

[John 1963]

sorry but the FOS are less than useless, their investigation on my behalf took 18 months and cost me a further £1800 in interest

[determindator]

I will have a look at your posts to see if you have reported FOS response. I agree, make noise where ever you can MP's, media, social networking. It all helps. Keep the faith John, I know it's hard to do that.

[John 1963]

I have given up totally with any consumer bodies, none are interested or prepared to do anything. My loan was paid off in 2012 or so I thought but because of the charges I now owe £8k, I am now paying them £50 a month which doesn't even cover the monthly interest. Even if I live another 30 years I will still owe over £8k for a £3k loan and by that time they will have had nearly £25k off me.

[determindator]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?354091-How-to-deal-with-Swift-Advances....&p=4162947#post4162947

 

post 30

 

May be a good idea to re visit the FOS complaint again

[meellis]

I have letters from swift that state that I am within my rights to consider the ombudsmen but being un-regulated the ombudsmen will not be able to do anything. Johns is supposed to be regulated but it seems that swift will still stick their fingers up to that.

[determindator]

Yes, they like psycho babble. All part of aggressive lending. Regulated or not there are fundamental English laws for which there is no get out. Keep complaining.

[John 1963]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?354091-How-to-deal-with-Swift-Advances....&p=4162947#post4162947

 

post 30

 

May be a good idea to re visit the FOS complaint again

 

 

 

 

It was the Ombudsman who made the final decision and he stated swift should refund me £800 in charges. But like I said in the time it took them to reach this conclusion it was costing me £100 a month in interest so I was still worse off and I refused to accept their findings. The FOS adjudicator told me that "it would be highly unlikely that Swift would continue to add charges whilst the FOS were investigating my complaint" this of course was utter rubbish.

[caro]

Although they don't take on individual cases please contact the FCA about your experiences. This new regulator seems to have more bottle to deal with companies than others and the more they get to hear about problems with Swift, the more likely they are to deal with them.

 

 

Don't forget that just because you've been to FOS, doesn't mean you can't take Swift to Court.

[John 1963]

Although they don't take on individual cases please contact the FCA about your experiences. This new regulator seems to have more bottle to deal with companies than others and the more they get to hear about problems with Swift, the more likely they are to deal with them.

 

 

Don't forget that just because you've been to FOS, doesn't mean you can't take Swift to Court.

 

 

 

 

the FCA have been contacted by many people and they are as toothless as the FOS, regards taking Swift to court even if I could afford to no decent barrister is prepared to take them on.

[determindator]

I believe the balance of the scales does tip in favour of these unfair agreements we have signed because these types of lenders bottom line is 'you've signed the agreement tough'. It should not be made easy for these types of lenders to be able to threaten repossession and then move onto execute that threat. There should be a mediation system set up to take the case away from the Courts in the first place. This gives the borrower a fair chance, because as it stands, it's these lenders who have the resources to be represented by financial savvy lawyers, not to say barristers. You would think they wouldn't need such force if their product was morally just.

 

We are not expected to be financial experts and do expect transparency and honesty. The powers that be should have put a stop to people being put into this detriment years ago.

[fletch70]

the FCA have been contacted by many people and they are as toothless as the FOS, regards taking Swift to court even if I could afford to no decent barrister is prepared to take them on.

 

For me the Jury is still out on the FCA. Once all the interim permissions are sorted then I will be more prepared to pass an opinion. An example is minicredit were givern a minded to revoke by the OFT yet still nothing has happened.

As for the FOS, well in my experience the adjudicator frequently sides with the lender but when passed to the ombudsman things change

[meellis]

Well if what I have read and understood about the FCA is true then I wouldn't hold you breath about any outstanding actions brought about by the OFT or FSA. My understanding is that the FCA hasn't got the remit to get involved in historic OFT or FSA case's and aren't able or interested in applying anything or enforcing any existing requirements. It seems to me they want to brush all existing investigations under the carpet and start afresh even though they are staffed by old OFT and FSA staff, I hope I am wrong.

[determindator]

Maybe we should write to the FCA to express this concern.

[fletch70]

Well if what I have read and understood about the FCA is true then I wouldn't hold you breath about any outstanding actions brought about by the OFT or FSA. My understanding is that the FCA hasn't got the remit to get involved in historic OFT or FSA case's and aren't able or interested in applying anything or enforcing any existing requirements. It seems to me they want to brush all existing investigations under the carpet and start afresh even though they are staffed by old OFT and FSA staff, I hope I am wrong.

 

That is not what they said to me when I asked why nothing has been done about MMF. They said that when they get round to looking at the interim permissions, all history including OFT censures will be looked at

[caro]

Maybe we should write to the FCA and OFT to express this concern.

 

OFT no longer exists as replaced for some things by fca and others by cma.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

That is not what they said to me when I asked why nothing has been done about MMF. They said that when they get round to looking at the interim permissions, all history including OFT censures will be looked at

Quite correct Fletch, data is collected and will be reviewed when the IP are considered.

[determindator]

OFT no longer exists as replaced for some things by fca and others by cma.

 

OFT removed from post now to keep post current for readers. I add this link which goes into more detail of the CPMA

 

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmtreasy/430/430vw18.htm

[caro]

OFT removed from post now to keep post current for readers. I add this link which goes into more detail of the CPMA

 

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmtreasy/430/430vw18.htm

 

 

 

I was referring to the CMA as per the link below.

 

 

The Office of Fair Trading was responsible for protecting consumer interests throughout the UK. It closed on 01 April 2014, with its responsibilities passing to a number of different organisations including the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and the Financial Conduct Authority.

For advice or help with a consumer problem, contact Citizens Advice.

View the closed OFT site in the UK Government Web Archive.