Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well the difference is that in all our other cases It was Kev who was trying to entrap the motorist so sticking two fingers up to him and daring him to try court was from a position of strength. In your case, sorry, you made a mistake so you're not in the position of strength.  I've looked on Google Maps and the signs are few & far between as per Kev's MO, but there is an entrance sign saying "Pay & Display" (and you've admitted in writing that you knew you had to pay) and the signs by the payment machines do say "Sea View Car Park" (and you've admitted in writing you paid the wrong car park ... and maybe outed yourself as the driver). Something I missed in my previous post is that the LoC is only for one ticket, not two. Sorry, but it's impossible to definitively advise what to so. Personally I'd probably gamble on Kev being a serial bottler of court and reply with a snotty letter ridiculing the signage (given you mentioned the signage in your appeal) - but it is a gamble.  
    • No! What has happened is that your pix were up-to-date: 5 hours' maximum stay and £100 PCN. The lazy solicitors have sent ancient pictures: 4 hours' maximum stay and £60 PCN. Don't let on!  Let them be hoisted by their own lazy petard in the court hearing (if they don't bottle before).
    • Thanks for all the suggestions so far I will amend original WS and send again for review.  While looking at my post at very beginning when I submitted photos of signs around the car park I noticed that it says 5 hours maximum stay while the signage sent by solicitor shows 4 hours maximum stay but mine is related to electric bay abuse not sure if this can be of any use in WS.
    • Not sure what to make of that or what it means for me, I was just about to head to my kip and it's a bit too late for legalise. When is the "expenditure occured"?  When they start spending money to write to me?  Or is this a bad thing (as "harsh" would imply)? When all is said and done, I do not have two beans to rub together, we rent our home and EVERYTHING of value has been purchased by and is in my wife's name and we are not financially linked in any way.  So at least if I can't escape my fate I can at least know that they will get sweet FA from me anyway   edit:  ah.. Sophia Harrison: Time bar decision tough on claimants WWW.SCOTTISHLEGAL.COM Time bar is a very complex area of law in Scotland relating to the period in which a claim for breach of duty can be pursued. The Scottish government...   This explains it like I am 5.  So, a good thing then because creditors clearly know they have suffered a loss the minute I stop paying them, this is why it is "harsh" (for them, not me)? Am I understanding this correctly?  
    • urm......exactly what you filed .....read it carefully... it puts them to strict proof to prove the debt is enforceable, so thus 'holds' their claim till they coughup or not and discontinue. you need to get readingthose threads i posted so you understand. then you'll know whats maybe next how to react or not and whats after that. 5-10 threads a day INHO. dont ever do anything without checking here 1st.
  • 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

Financial Ombudsman - a recommendation


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5858 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

An email to the FO, I wonder if I'll get a reply, what does FO stand for again? Oh yes, I remember now.

 

Dear sir/madam,

 

I am writing to inform you of my intention to take Clydesdale Bank PLc to court to recover more than £2,500 (+interest) of illegal charges made to my account over the past six years, I am also researching how I can go back to 1976 when I opened my account. Communication with the bank can only be described as atrocious with two certain cases of Data Protection violations and one possible but unconfirmed. Their behaviour is aggressive, threatening and obstructive to the point where on application for my personal details under the Data Protection Act I was informed that details further back than 2005 would have to be paid for at £5 PER STATEMENT, I had to contact the Information Commissioners Office to compel the bank to provide me with the details I am legally entitled to. Their claim to have misunderstood the Data Protection Act displays either incompetence by the data controller or a cynical means of having consumers go to as much trouble as possible to dissuade them from pursuing their claim. Personally I think it is the latter as I am in touch with, via the Consumer Action Group, a number of people who received the same letter.

 

Whilst on the subject of the Consumer Action Group, I would like to point out that I have received immense assistance from an organisation set up to assist consumers maintain and defend their rights, a mission the Financial Ombudsman is clearly failing to accomplish. I should not have to be subjected to the humiliation of dealing with a barely literate organisation that on occasion’s fails even to address their letters to me correctly (Clydesdale Bank not the FO).

 

I trust you will add this email to the many you have already received from Consumer Action Group contributors.

 

Yours Faithfully

 

Dread

Been screwed by banks all my life, it's payback time!!!!

 

OK as I seem to be handing out advice here I guess I had better add a disclaimer to my signature, Caro, hope you don't mind but I nicked yours.

 

Advice & opinions given by Dread are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 257
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Battleaxe

Will the FO react to the emails?

Will the FO do something?

Will the FO stop sitting on the fence?

 

All this will be answered in the sands of time.

 

Writing to your MP might help. Even if you get the same response which I received, you will know what side of the fence your MP lives on. Mine, has interest in several Banking organisations and he is all for punitive charges to dissuade us from going overdrawn. Of course go OD and help swell my pension fund..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will the FO react to the emails?

Will the FO do something?

Will the FO stop sitting on the fence?

 

All this will be answered in the sands of time.

 

Writing to your MP might help. Even if you get the same response which I received, you will know what side of the fence your MP lives on. Mine, has interest in several Banking organisations and he is all for punitive charges to dissuade us from going overdrawn. Of course go OD and help swell my pension fund..

 

No way? did he say that?

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Battleaxe

He didn't tell me to boost his pension fund but yes he said the charges were good idea in these days of rising debt.

 

See my thread 'I know what my MP thinks'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if I was dreaming, but last night, on TV, our nations leader, Mr TB, invited anyone and everyone to let the Government know about any issue that concerns you:

 

All you need do is text - Talk - Unlawful Bank Charges and send it to 62233

Lloyds TSB - £3,300.00 + £250.00 from FOS.

***FULL SETTLEMENT RECEIVED***

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill UK

 

All they can do is investigate, they do nothing else and have no powers to award damages or anything. I re-iterated that this why the financial institutions sneer at us and recommend that we take our complaint up with them knowing this.

Phillipa

 

 

Considering the following from the article on the This Is Money website -

 

...he threatened to make a legal ruling that will force banks to pay back all charges....

 

Mr Merricks warns that if banks failed to pay back consumers, or if the OFT investigation was lengthy, then he would be forced to weigh in with a ruling that could force banks to reimburse customers.

 

and even better

 

Instead, he wants banks to accept that their charges are unfair and refund them when customers complain, rather than resorting to delaying tactics and bargaining over how much they should refund....

 

...Chief ombudsman Walter Merricks believes that if banks reimburse those customers who are prepared to complain several times, then they should have to pay back money to everyone who makes a claim.

 

 

I am thinking about trying to get hold of a more direct and useable quote to this effect that could possibly be added on to the prelim letters. Plus we then continuously hound him/them asking why he hasn't carried through with his threat even the banks are still holding out till the last minute on every single claim. Not to mention the abuse of the court system.

 

I know it's an empty threat but our complaints would have more of a solid backing if the banks are directly conflicting with what the FO says and if it got a little publicity on this angle it would do no harm.

If you found this post useful please click on the scales above.

 

Egg - £400 - Prelim sent. On hold.

Mint - On the list Est £800

GE Capital - On the list (3 accounts!) Est £4000

 

MBNA - £545 Prelim sent 13/11/2006

LBA sent 1/12/2006

£350 partial payment received 18/12/2006.

Full settlement received 20/1/07

 

NatWest - Est £4000 not incl interest

Data Protection Act Sent 10/1/07

Statements received 24/1/07

Prelim sent 3/2/07

Full Settlement received 22/2/07

 

The contents of this post are the sole opinions of The Cornflake and not necessarily the opinions of any other members of this group. They do not constitute sound legal or financial advice and if in doubt you are advised to seek advice from a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I just sent email to FO as well.

I will now fill in small claim against Halifax, regarding approx. £900.00

If I helped you click on my scales (on the bottom on right hand site). Thanks

 

July 2006 - DPA sent - never got reply

September 2006 - First letter sent, got offer for half of charges, Thanks but no thanks reply with LBA sent in October 2006

January 2007 - filed Small Claim on-line

after some mix-ups on 14 February 2007 Small Claim pack served to Halifax

they have 6 weeks (Claim from NI take longer) until 28 March 2007 to respond

 

See my thread:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank-bank-scotland/71700-kecimot-against-halifax-learn.html

 

Direct contact for Halifax

 

Matthew Ingham

Team Leader - Regulated Sales

Customer Relations - Halifax

HBOS Plc

CB/2/CR/26527

Direct Dial: 01422 326 527

[email protected]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Email sent - synopsis - ombudsman is toothless and government cow tows to the banks. To think I could have been interviewed by Sky News this week too!!

Barclays -

- initial letter sent

- LBA sent 30/10/06

- settlement "good will" offer 10/11/06

- rejection letter sent 11/11/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

mine done

Spanish Holiday Rental - 10% off BAG and CAG Members

www.rent-in-spain.org.uk

 

 

Progress so far:

 

Yorkshire Bank - LBA 26/07/06 £1001.00 - £500.50 offered and rejected

RBS Credit Card - Settled £200.00

Sainsburys - Settled in full £100.00

JD WIlliams - Settled in full £50.00

Argos Card Services - £98 - offered £60 and rejected.

Abbey Mortgages - MCOL 2nd October - Deadline 21st

Link to post
Share on other sites

A reply from the FO, and my reply follows.

Dear Mr King

Thank you for your email.

I am afraid that there are some limitations to our powers. One of these is that we do not have a general "policing" function with regard to banks. We do not, for example, have power to order or recommend that a bank should limit its charges to a particular level or should exercise its discretion in levying charges in particular circumstances.

I note from your email that you are unhappy with the business practice of the bank and therefore you should refer to the industry regulators; Financial Services Authority (FSA.) They can be contacted on;

Financial Services Authority

25 The North Colonnade

Canary Wharf

London

E14 5HS

Tel: 0207 0661000

Fax: 0207 6761099

Web Site: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/

Yours sincerely

Kerry Scannell

Consumer Consultant

Financial Ombudsman Service

Tel- 0207 093 7034

My Reply:

Dear Ms. Scannell,

Many thanks for your reply. I will forward details to the Financial Services Authority.

I would, however, expect that some or all of the following areas are within your power:

Applying pressure to banks to follow legal procedures for administering charges.

Notifying banks operating under your sanction that their policies are unfair on the consumer.

Acting on complaints brought to you by consumers.

Nevertheless, I am grateful for the response, and will continue my course of action through Her Majesty's Court Service.

Yours Sincerely,

So it looks like a forwarded mail to the FSA is next!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Alison82

Hi folks, here is the response to from my email

 

Dear xxxxxxx

 

Thank you for your email.

 

I am afraid that there are some limitations to our powers. One of these is that

we do not have a general "policing" function with regard to banks. We do not,

for example, have power to order or recommend that a bank should limit its

charges to a particular level or should exercise its discretion in levying

charges in particular circumstances.

 

I note from your email that you are unhappy with the business practice of the

bank and therefore you should refer to the industry regulators; Financial

Services Authority (FSA.) They can be contacted on;

 

Financial Services Authority

25 The North Colonnade

Canary Wharf

London

E14 5HS

Tel: 0207 0661000

Fax: 0207 6761099

 

Web Site: FSA

 

Yours sincerely

 

Leigh Williams

Consumer Consultant

Financial Ombudsman Service

Tel- 0207 093 7016

Fax- 0207 093 7017

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just sent off my email, hopefully they will start getting the point....

eventually....

 

I dunno, mate, you'd hope, eh?

 

I've written a letter to my MP about all this and he's sent it to the state secretary for the department of trade and industry. If we all lobby our MP's they might start getting the picture!!

 

I have a thread with it all in, if you want to have the link, let me know!!

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to me that the FO and OFT are both a waste of time. Whilst continuing to attack the banks directly, I would suggest as many letters to MPs as possible. AND, someone on this site must be able to get some media exposure. Get 'consumer action group' on the news or Watchdog and I think we will start to see some results.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to me that the FO and OFT are both a waste of time. Whilst continuing to attack the banks directly, I would suggest as many letters to MPs as possible. AND, someone on this site must be able to get some media exposure. Get 'consumer action group' on the news or Watchdog and I think we will start to see some results.

 

Well, I've emailed Watchdog today - if more people do then the researchers will have to take notice:

 

Try this:

BBC - Consumer - TV and radio - TV and radio

 

and I've written to my MP who has referred my letter on to the state secretary for the department of tradee and industry, so it will be interesting to see what their reply is.

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the link - I've just emailed them too.

 

No probs! :)

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...