Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They said hi is this (name) I said no and they asked if he’s there tell him to contact us in regards to Sainsbury’s  I said ok bye
    • Block the number and ignore them.
    • How did the conversation go? See what other think but I'm not sure you need to speak to them. HB
    • Dwf have contacted me by telephone  I haven’t confirmed anything 
    • Now received a pack from Barclays Marked " Personal Data Request" and "Start of Right of Access Response" It was sent by their General data protection Team and includes details for a loan account and a credit card. The loan details includes a copy of a signed Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974, signed by me and dated 2/9/2004. It refers to Terms and conditions overleaf, but copies of these were not included in the package just received. The Original Loan expiry date was September 2009. Barclaycard: Their records indicate Last Billed 15/03/2024 (not rcvd. by me) Last date account in order and not delinquent 15/03/2024. Date account closed 31/12/9999 (!), They show "Account not in Collections" and last payment posted 16/04/2007(!) also Last Payment Recorded as 02/10/2023. In their memo Details section: Section 78 Outcome "unenforceable" recorded on 12/10/2023. As stated in this thread, I had been paying off both the loan and card. I had stopped paying the card but am still paying the loan's nominal monthly payments.  
  • 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 
        • 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

Natwest Chargeback refusal - Banners Broker


SteveUK10
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3596 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

Hello Everybody

 

I'm one of the fools that trusted a friend who got me to bite my tongue and join Banners Broker even though I had my doubts about the company.

 

I put in no small amount and of through being online found out it was indeed my worst fears and it was a spoof

 

Now I've been in a fight to get my money back from this seriously depressing experience for over 9 months now and I'm not giving up,

 

there's a liquidator appointed now and there's the charge back service or at least I thought there was a chargeback service.

 

My latest fight has been with my Natwest

 

asking them to pursue visas 540 day chargeback service under the section

" Goods not received" And a lot of other affiliates have been successful with this.

 

Natwest is playing hardball though this is the response I got off them today.

 

The latest one I've been hit with and I'm trying to get my head around is this

"You've used part of this company's service by them creating an account allowing you to deposit money into it

and the possibility to make withdrawals.

 

I responded by saying I'm disputing the terms and conditions where it says they will pay affiliates commissions

and that all liquidation request will be honoured etc, so I've not received their service.

 

They're saying

"That withdrawals is only a partial service they are providing to you and as we can't ascertain

what the value of that service is we can't pursue a chargeback."

 

They went on to say that

"The terms and conditions under section C only provide remit for a legal chargeback not through visa's chargeback service."

 

This is section C from Banners Broker

 

Section C (Affiliate & Client)

Payment Conditions

I adhere to the following:

  1. All liquidation requests made shall be honored within fifteen business days for standard subscribers and seven business days for premium subscribers to the payment amount noted in your back office.

  2. All commissions and bonuses are paid in the name of the applicant on the affiliate/client agreement.

I don't know what to do

 

I know there are successful affiliates who have claimed their money back through their banks.

 

I just don't know what to say to my bank and

 

I'm really not sure why they're hung up on the possibility of a withdrawal only being a partial service

and that I had some service by the company creating an account etc.

 

What's really baffling me is that I've sent them the liquidation letter from the court 2 times already

and this is the latest in a series of excuses to not follow the charge back request.

 

I'm fighting both banners broker and my bank

 

how am I the one who looses and what's worse is this banks ethos is going above and beyond in customer service.

 

I know I'm idiot for getting involved

 

I've been living with that for the 1 year and a few months.

 

Do I have a leg to stand on or do I wait the long wait and put all my eggs in the liquidator basket?

 

Plz If you guys have anything that could help I'd really love to hear from you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've sent in the following information

 

 

A guide explaining exactly what happened

Screen shots of when the money was taken

Screen shots of my wallet

Information on the liquidators

Letter from the court saying the company was declared a Ponzi and put into liquidation

 

The person I spoke to who was a manager in the retail disputes department said at the beginning there was a training issue,

but NatWest have had this sent to their fraud department and seem unwilling to act.

 

I'm the victim of a well disguised Ponzi scheme but NatWest are making me feel worse than I already feel.

 

I know I made a mistake but so long as there's a chance to get some of my money back I'm going to fight to try and get it.

 

Disappointed with NatWest they have all the information they need to try n recover this money indeed their response to me is based on the company they'd try n recover the money back from being a legitimate company she couldn't seem to get it that this company is now liquidated etc.

 

Is my only option to go to the financial ombudsmen and complain about NatWest?

 

Remember other banks have successfully charged back money for their customers using visas 540 day rule, why can't NatWest?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi SteveUK10

 

Welcome to CAG

 

Write a Formal Letter of Complaint, mark it as such. Explain what's happened, how they have let you down and what you want them to do.

 

What you also need to do is include COBS as the NatWest have signed up to these key principles, do some research on COBS.

 

NatWestare regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority, NatWest have to adhere to a set of legally binding key principles laid down in the Conduct of Business Sourcebook. NatWest has treated me unfairly under the following COBS Principles:-

 

Principle 6 - Customers' interests - A firm must pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly.

 

Principle 7 - Communications with clients - A firm must pay due regard to the information needs of its clients, and communicate information to them in a way which is clear, fair and not misleading.

 

 

Send it to:-

Mr Ross McEwan

Chief Executive

RBS

[email protected]

 

Also report it to Action Fraud :- http://www.actionfraud.police.uk/

 

Then complain to the FOS, also set up or join an action group.

Link to post
Share on other sites

not really helping are they NatWest

 

sadly that's the usual response from them regarding chargeback.

 

dx

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

Hey rebel11 and dx100uk thanks for replying and for the advice :-).

 

 

When I take a step back and look at it It's absolutely insane they're trying to find out what the value is of a PONZI scheme's ability to send withdrawals to me is? That's nuts it's legitimising a Ponzi by letting them keep my money and making me fight to get it back. I just really can't get my head around that, ok I've been really stupid in falling for something but surely NatWest who's ethos is customer service should be supporting me more than they are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I take a step back and look at it It's absolutely insane they're trying to find out what the value is of a PONZI scheme's ability to send withdrawals to me is?.

 

They have to abide by the Visa Operating Regulations which makes it clear that chargeback claims are limited to the portion of services which are not received.

 

I assume that you have also made contact with the liquidator to attempt to get your money because that is another condition of the chargeback scheme?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have to abide by the Visa Operating Regulations which makes it clear that chargeback claims are limited to the portion of services which are not received.

 

I assume that you have also made contact with the liquidator to attempt to get your money because that is another condition of the chargeback scheme?

 

 

So do visa operating regulations include the services of Ponzi schemes? please if they do I'd love to see a link to it?

 

 

Because that's what your saying here that visa need to know the value of the services that were not received from a Ponzi scheme, and a company that's been put into liquidation by a court of law.

Edited by SteveUK10
Link to post
Share on other sites

So do visa operating regulations include the services of Ponzi schemes? please if they do I'd love to see a link to it?

 

 

Because that's what your saying here that visa need to know the value of the services that were not received from a Ponzi scheme, and a company that's been put into liquidation by a court of law.

 

You are asking Natwest to make a Chargeback for "Services Not Provided". Whether that service later turns out to be a Ponzi scheme or a pyramid scheme is beyond the scope of those regulations.

 

Can you point me towards or provide me with a copy the terms and conditions which govern your payment to this company?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Govern payments to this company could you elaborate on that a little? I'm not sure what your asking here?

 

 

This is what I found in the terms and conditions about payments to them

 

 

Section J (Affiliate & Client)

Registration

1. Ordering. All purchases of product inventory, sales aids, literature and supplies are strictly optional and are made available online or through the Ordering Department depending on the requirements of the country of residence.

2. Acceptable Methods of Payment. Payments may be made for all online orders through the use of a company approved payment method such as SolidTrust Pay, Payza and AlliedWallet. If you choose Allied Wallet as your payment method your credit card statement will read EW-BannersBroker18882551137

 

 

All those mentioned in point 2 are payment processors etc.

 

Edited by SteveUK10
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...