Jump to content


RBS, Capquest, Wescott Credit - all about to pay by the Ombudsman?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1944 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

Hi everyone,

 

I'm a newbie on here (2nd post) and think I just made my first school boy error

- spent hours (literally) tying up my obviously massive story, then go to post - and I'm timed out. Lesson learnt.

 

So I'll attempt to be as succinct as possible this time but it's nott an easy story to tell, so bear with me pls!

 

I initially incurred debt with RBS in 2002 after losing my Father.

Things are a bit foggy about that year or two in my life but I accept I incurred a debt of around £3,000.

 

After a few negotiations as I remember, the debt was passed to a collections agency - Wecott Debt Recovery.

I made an arrangement with them to repay the debt.

A debt which I have not defaulted on in one single month in 11 years to date.

The debt now stands at just under £400.

 

(Now the interesting bit!)....

In March 2006 I start receiving really quite offensive letters from a company I had never heard of until then.

Namely Capquest.

I know for a fact that - silly as it seems - I did make erratic one-off payments to them over the years that followed

and as the tone and frequency of their actions seemingly had no limits,

 

I even had my poor Mum make a payment or two for me.

Not because I asked her

- but because they began to phone my Mother's landline and speak to her about my debt!. :mad:

Then my 88-year-old Grandmother started getting the calls too...:mad::mad:

 

I eventually made more payments to them but only on the basis I was disputing the entire debt

and that it be put 'on hold' until sorted out properly.

This was some time in 2009.

 

This managed to keep them quiet - despite the odd phonecall or letter - for a time.

 

In early 2011 I start getting mail sent to my Mothers address again.

The threatening stuff; doorstep collections; court action; 'freezing of my wages' etc.

 

I got on the phone to the bunch and set things straight.

I spoke to a senior manager (whom I won't name...yet)

who explained he had looked over my account and although I wasn't to 'get too excited'

- he thought I had made an overpayment and might be entitled to some form of rebate.

This did actually make sense and I did believe this guy's sincerity.

I agreed to speak with them in depth (Capquest).

 

It turned out they didn't have a clue about pretty much anything.

Nothing other than they represented RBS (their client) and the debt (of just over £3,000-odds) had been sold to them in 2006.

Exactly when the letters and phonecalls started....

 

At this point I decided I needed to do some serious research on my own.

The obvious thing that stood out to me was the potential for RBS to have mis-sold (illegally????)

my 'debt' information onto a 2nd collections agency (remembering I had a flawless arrangement in place with Wescott for this very debt since early 2004).

The more phonecalls I made and letters I sent, the deeper this story seemed to go...

 

Wescott Opinions:Flawless Client who took on his debt and repayed by s/o as agreed & on time

 

Capquest Opinions: Quote(!) 'Wescott have been paying us. You make payment to them, and they make payments to us'.

 

I'm beyond confused.

 

I write directly to RBS demanding answers.

I get a one page response saying effectively that are not legally obliged to provide any information regarding the account

as it's been over 6 years since the inception of the debt.

They're not even obliged to tell me how much the debt had initially been.

 

Onto the Ombudsman.

I write a HUGE report detailing everything (even more than I've rant on here).

I get a message back to say they can't entertain it (the 6 year rule again).

 

I write an appeal and ask that they read my report in full and consider that the case is not over 6 years old but that it is ongoing

- as I am still receiving threatening letters.

They reply they have reconsidered and take on my case. :T

 

It's almost 5 months later and despite keeping in touch with the Ombudsman, it's taken this long for them to investigate it.

 

I got a phonecall from the Ombudsman last week.

They explained RBS wanted to make me an offer.

I got excited

- I thought this had all paid off, all this stress and worry - but I needn't have been.

 

The offer the Ombudsman had was from RBS directly and was simply 'to nulify the debt'.

 

I made it politely clear I rejected their offer. The Ombudsman acknowledged this.

 

NOW THIS IS THE BIT I NEED A HELP WITH;

 

I heard from the Ombudsman at the beginning of this week.

They say the only way they can make the financial aspect of my offer more preferable and recoup my overpayments,

I must provide receipts of the transactions made directly to Capquest. This is just not possible.

 

I have spent days speaking with my Banks callcentre,

I've even been with an appointment with my Bank manager who could see my predicament, buy couldn't help me out.

The receipts the Ombudsman is requesting is simply impossible evidence to request.

 

I've now been told I have one week to provide this evidence before the Ombudsman rules.

 

Can anyone who has read this post (and thank you anyone that has!) advise on ANY aspect of my situation?

 

I can't explain how frustrating it is to almost have won my battle after all these years

- but be just a piece of paper away from losing it al too.

 

Has anyone else been in this position?

Has anyone taken court action against a Bank in this kind of circumstance?

Clearly, ANY advice is very greatly appreciated!

Sincerely,

Openwater

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 152
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

little tip

 

next time type your reply

if it is long

into notepad program

and copy and paste from there.

 

now onto your issues.

 

I would be issuing RBS with a subject access report sar

I would be issuing wescot with a subject access report sar

I would be issuing cabot with a subject access report sar

 

 

that will give you all the details you require

if you've not already does this

 

 

it is a legal document

and the must respond to it.

 

 

sorry but reading your sorry tale

it smacks to me that you've been cash cowed from day one

of when RBS sold the debt on.

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

Hi,

 

And thanks for the extremely speedy reply - forenotes taken...

 

I'm in no doubt you know exactly where you mean to go with this but I'm a little slower.

 

Is this under the Freedom of Information Act and once issued upon the aforementioned institutions - what would you then suggesting?

Link to post
Share on other sites

no its not FIA

 

 

its an sar to each one

 

 

it appears to me :

1 payments were made to wescot whilst RBS was still their client

2.payments were made to wescot after the debt was sold to capquest in 2006 and fwded to CQ

 

 

you need to contact the FOS and ask them to hold any actions or whatever for atleast 60 days

whilst numerous SAR's are complied with.

 

 

do you still have the copy of your FOS letter

 

 

in all the paperwork you must have?

have you the 2006 notice of assignment?

 

 

once you have all the statements from the sar

we can then deal with the reply to the FOS.

 

 

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

Yeah, I think I can see where you're coming from.

I have all the paperwork or copies of it.

 

I'm just a bit unclear as to what he next step is once all SARs are complied with?

Link to post
Share on other sites

it will tell you all the payments you have made

which is what the FOS want.............

 

 

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

Also

- write to the FOS and tell them that you have now made requests for statutory disclosure of your personal data

and that as they know there is a 40 day time limit for this, that they should suspend their work on the case

until 60 days has expired in order to give you tome to receive the data and to consider it.

 

I think that you could also point out to the Ombudsman that it is unfair that this method of obtaining data hadn't been pointed out to you by any parties

and that it was only a matter of good luck that you have discovered it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Thought I should update and let you know

 

 

I contacted the Ombudsman today via Email,

essentially to advise them how unreasonable their request for such specific information was

but also to advise that if this were the only way forward,

 

 

I would have no choice but to attempt to obtain the information via the statutory disclosure of my personal data from all 3 companies

- which in turn would take 40-60 days to receive, digest and act upon.

 

I'll update you with the response once received.

 

I have a question for you guys.

What happens once the Ombudsman makes their final adjudication?

Is that the final word, law-of-the-land?

- or could I, or even the Bank - dispute the ruling?

 

This being the case,

would you consider I may have grounds for legal action via small claims or similar against RBS?

 

As ever - ANY and ALL contributions are very much welcomed.

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Openwater

Link to post
Share on other sites

all routes are open to you.

 

 

however, once you have the evidence of what you paid

to whom

what was owed

and what were penalty charges

 

 

I think you'll find there will be little room for anyone to argue against your case.

 

 

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

Thanks Dx,

 

Your input has been of significant value to me and I will continue you to update as and when.

 

I'm not a legally qualified guy, just someone that knows a little bit about business.

 

When you suggest 'all routes will be open' - I'm taking that is suggestive of legal action - which I have very limited experience of.

 

This might be a strange one - even for on here - but is there a book you could suggest I read?!!! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

no better book than CAG dear sir!

 

1000's of threads here to read

 

 

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

[ And like the architypical newbie / fool - I just Googled 'CAG'. 'Nuff said.

 

I will indeed have a peruse around the site - it's certainly assisted me thus far!

 

Cheers,

 

Openwater

 

So as of the end of play today, no response from the FOS.

 

Having read several threads on this site regarding Capquest, I'm beginning to question my MO here.

 

Once the FOS has replied (either way it will be in my favour)

- am I still entitled to purse Capquest in a civil court for matters such as harassment etc.?

If so, RBS too for mis-selling my data?

 

ANY advice is ALWAYS welcomed!

Link to post
Share on other sites

doubt if theres any data mis-sale, think you've been reading freemen of the land sites here.

 

 

I'd await your data and the FOS reply.

 

 

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
doubt if theres any data mis-sale, think you've been reading freemen of the land sites here.

 

 

I'd await your data and the FOS reply.

 

 

dx

 

:?: Not entirely sure of the intent of that comment Dx? But I have been reading a lot about Capquest on here and other forums.

 

From what I'd gathered from these sources, I'd concluded that although the FOS may deal with RBS on my behalf - it may be left to me to chase Capquest - in a civil action - probably for harassment or the like. No?

Link to post
Share on other sites

harassment for what?

 

 

It turned out they didn't have a clue about pretty much anything.

Nothing other than they represented RBS (their client) and the debt (of just over £3,000-odds) had been sold to them in 2006.

Exactly when the letters and phonecalls started....

 

 

 

they as you state [but poss wrongly quoted], stated their client was RBS

if the debt was sold in 2006, they had no 'client' but themselves.

 

 

they purchased a debt that the OC [RBS] sold

prob because they were not confident they'd win in court

as the debt was most prob unlawful charges.

 

 

if collecting on such a debt is harassment, I think it would be diff to prove.

 

 

I'd await all the info, and the resultant FOS outcome.

 

 

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

:?: :?::?::?::?::?::?::?::?::?::?:

 

harassment for what? CHASING ME FOR 9 YEARS FOR A DEBT THAT DID NOT BELONG TO THEM?

It turned out they didn't have a clue about pretty much anything.

Nothing other than they represented RBS (their client) and the debt (of just over £3,000-odds) had been sold to them in 2006.

Exactly when the letters and phonecalls started....

 

CORRECT. AND AT THAT TIME (2006) i WAS ALREADY 2 YEARS INTO A PAYMENT PLAN WITH WESCOT TO REPAY THE DEBT. MY POINT - CAPQUEST NEVER OWNED IT IN THE 1ST INSTANCE. FURTHERMORE, IN 2006 WHEN THIS AROSE I MADE CAPQUEST AWARE OF THAT I HAD NO INTENTIONS OF PAYING THIS DEBT AS IT WAS STATUTE BARRED, THEREFORE SHOULD HAVE BEEN DROPPED BY THEM ENTIRELY IN 2012. NO?

 

they as you state [but poss wrongly quoted], stated their client was RBS

if the debt was sold in 2006, they had no 'client' but themselves.

 

THEY CLEARLY STATE THEIR CLIENT WAS AND IS RBS.

ARE YOU SUGGESTING HERE THAT ONCE THE DEBT HAS BEEN 'SOLD' (TO CAPQUEST IN THIS CASE) THE COMPANY WHO BOUGHT IT NO LONGER HAVE A 'CLIENT'?

they purchased a debt that the OC [RBS] sold

prob because they were not confident they'd win in court

as the debt was most prob unlawful charges.

 

I'M UNCLEAR AS TO YOUR THOUGHT PROCESS HERE Dx: RBS WEREN'T CONFIDENT THEY'D WIN IN COURT? IF SO, DUE TO UNLAWFUL CHARGES FROM WHOM???

 

if collecting on such a debt is harassment, I think it would be diff to prove.

I'd await all the info, and the resultant FOS outcome.

dx

 

I will of course await the FOS reply but in the meantime, everything you make comment on fascinates me.

I am operating at the peak of my knowledge and experience and you guys obviously know a lot more than I.

 

Therefore, again - ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION is ALWAYS VERY GRATEFULLY RECEIVED! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

any dca can chase and accept payments on behalf of their client.

 

 

if the debt was thus sold, then wetcloths simply had a change of client

once a dca owns the debt, obv if you are paying them, they have no client

- nothing there constitutes 'harrassment'

 

 

the debt would not of been statute barred in 2012 if you were paying anyone for it within the previous 6yrs.

 

 

the charges comment was in relation to what you owed RBS in the first place

I suspect the majority of the balance will be for things charged to you

for beaking some kind of 'rule' missed DD, late payment, etc etc.

 

 

await and see.

 

 

its pretty much pointless at this tage speculating about what you could

or could not do

until we have all the info.

 

 

get those 3 sar's off and inform the FOS you wish atleast a 60 day hold on their actions.

 

 

sorry if you've already done these.

 

 

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

Again, thanks Dx for expalining that for me.

 

One of the points you raised is actually one I hope works in my favour.

 

 

The FOS has told me all they require is evidence of 1 payment I made to Capquest.

Due to the 6 year restriction, this isn't information I can obtain.

 

On the flip side of the coin though

- and as you state

- statute time bar cannot be enforced unless 6 years of nil payments have passed...

 

Ultimately meaning either capquest HAVE received payments from me in that time,

allowing them to persue me

- or they haven't,

meaning they are in breach of the statute time bar application. No?

 

I will hopefully receive some form of reply from the FOS tmw and consequently

 

 

- if appropriate still - follow up with those 3 SARs

Thanks again Dx ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Hi again folks,

 

I've returned after almost 2 months needing some advice again.

 

 

Those 2 months btw were spent awaiting a reply from the FOS.

 

I received my reply this week.

It was not what I'd hoped for in fact quite the opposite.

 

I won't reiterate my case details here as it's all in the this thread.

If anything is missing and anyone out there feels the need to ask in order to help me, please do not hesitate to ask.

 

My reply from the FOS was reasonably short and and to the point;

 

Quote;

 

'Complaint

My understanding of your complaint is that the debt you had with RBS has been passed on to two separate agencies, Capquest and Wesot. You feel that you have been paying both agencies, and you have overpaid the debt.

 

Findings

For clarification purposes,

I can appreiate that I initially formed my opinion, stating that the complaint was outside of our jurisdiction, as RBS had raised this.

However, since my last opinion on your complaint, it has come to light that we are able to consider the complaint.

 

After speaking with you, I can completely appreciate that you have been inonvenienced throughout the years as a result of this matter.

I understand you have made sporadic payments to Capquest, and you have continued to pay Wescot on a monthly basis without default for over 10 years.

You have said essentially, the reason you made these sporadic payments to Capquest, was to keep them at bay.

 

RBS has told me that it's Debt Management Team contacted Capquest.

Capquest confirmed that on 2 accounts they have for you, they have not reeived any payments directly from you.

The only payments they have received have been passed on from RBS.

 

 

During my investigation, I questioned why RBS has made payments to Capquest, and why they were sporadic.

Rbs onfirmed that payments were made to Capquest because at this time, the Debt had been sold on to Capquest by the bank,

and they were the collecting agaent for the debt.

 

 

The reason why the payments were sporadi to Capquest was because the funds were initially received to RBs's fortuitous reoveries account.

RBS has said that it is likely that a number of payments were received over the timescale of the reports.

 

In reviewing the capquest statements you have provided to this service, I can see that a number of payments were made onc ertain days.

For example, in excess of 20 payments were made for £20 each on 9th January 2014.

Therefore, I am of the opinion, that it is more likely than not, that RBS sent these payments onto Capquest.

 

RBS have offered to write off any remaining debt.

(*PLEASE NOTE - THIS 'REMAING DEBT NOW TOTALS A MERE £80....)

 

 

I can see from the statements you have provided from Wescot, that the account was with withdrawn by RBS on 2nd March 2105

(*PLEASE NOTE - SINCE THIS DATE I HAVE CONTINUED TO PAY £20 PER MONTH TO WESCOT

WHO IN TURN HAVE BEEN FORWARDING THE AMOUNTS DIRECTLY TO RBS.

THIS WAS AS I WAS ADVISED BY WESCOT)

 

I completely appreiate that you have had difficulties in obtaining statements to prove that you have made payments to Capquest.

I appreiate that you have expressed that you feel that this is an unreasonable request.

 

 

However in the absence of any evidence to suggest that you have made payments to Capquest,

I am unable to recommend that RBS takes any further action in relation to your complaint.

 

 

However, if you feel you have made payments to Capquest that you shouldn't have, this should be addressed diretly with Capquest.

 

I understand that this is likely to come as a disappointment to you, and that this has been a distressing situation over the course of the years.

But based on evidence I currently have, I am of the opinion that the offer that you owe no further money in relation to the debt is fair

and reasonable in the circumstances, and in line with what this service would recommend.

 

 

I note that as there is no evidence suggesting that you overpaid the debt,

and therefore I do feel that the offer covers the trouble and the upset you have experienced.

 

Conclusions

I hope you will accept my assessment.

However if you have any new points that you would like us to take into account - and which you think could make a difference to the outcome

- please let me have them by 10th July 2015.

 

 

If you want to reply that you do not think that you will be able to by then, please let me know as soon as possible.

 

To accept my opinion in full and final settlement of the complaint, please sign, date and return the attached settlement form

so that it reaches me by 10th July 2015. I will then ask RBS to setlle the matter with you directly.

 

As a reminder, you have the right to ask the Ombudsman to review your complaint - as the final stage in our process.

However, I hope this will not now be necessary.

I look forward to hearing from you......'

 

My friends, I simply do not know what action - if any - I am left to take and am very open and grateful for any assistance or opinions you may be able to offer me.

 

I am not only disappointed with the FOS response but angry at the notion that they feel £80

- which now has effectively also been paid off too (due to my ongoing payments of £20 per month since March - in which IS STILL IN PLACE)

is 'fair and just' compensation for over 12 years of harrassment and threats from Capquest,

whilst all the time paying a monthly D/D to Wescot for the same debt which I never once defaulted on in 12 years.

 

None of the questions I asked of the FOS (of which there were many) have been answered,

e.g.;

How much was the initial debt for?

 

Was interest applied?

 

How much of an (unfair) adverse effect on my credit rating has this had over the years?

 

If Capquest claim no payment was made diretly to them - was it legal for them to 'chase' me for 9 years?

 

The questions go on and on - none of which were addressed in the letter of response from FOS.

 

I am hesitant to reply to the letter without some advice.

 

Can anyone help please?

 

Thank you (very much) in advance.

 

Openwater

Link to post
Share on other sites

pretty much the answer I suggested earlier too them.

 

 

did you get those 3 sars off to get all the statements

to prove your points?

 

 

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

Hi dx,

 

I was hoping you might still be around :)

 

I'm going to sound like a bit of a muppet here but in short - no.

 

In my last Email to the FOS previous to me sending my last piece of hardcopy correspondence to them - which was a VERY text-heavy and lengthy report that included evidence - what I thought was evidence at least (Capquest letters saying things such as 'we have received your payment' etc.) - I had, as you suggested, put the SAR option to Her (FOS). My exact extract from the mail was;

'It seems apparent to me and from advice I have taken that the only - and indeed last - option left for me to exhaust in order to obtain the aforementioned evidence is to serve requests for statutory disclosure of my personal data to all 3 companies. That is; RBS, Capquest and Wescott.

 

I must concede I feel this to be extreme lengths to be asked to go to. However it does seem from all my research over many weeks and months the only option left in order to obtain said evidence.

 

As I am aware, this may take 40 days and I would therefore be forced to request you suspend your investigations for 60 days in order for me to receive and digest the information.

 

Could you please advise on your thoughts before I proceed with the above?

 

Is hardcopy financial statements between myself and Capquest the only evidence you would consider in order you make your final adjudication?'

 

Her reply;

 

'Thank you for your emails.

 

Whilst I have been reviewing the emails that you have sent in, unfortunately I am not able to provide you with a full response today. Once I receive and review the final piece of documentation you have sent in, I will provide you with a full response, taking into consideration what the new information says.

 

Right now, your complaint does still remain open and I am unable to confirm whether I can suspend investigation. I have not experienced the nature of this request before, as such, I will need to discuss this aspect.

 

In the meantime, if you have any questions or queries, please do not hesitate to contact me.

 

Yours sincerely....'

 

I never heard anything back for a fortnight after this, so then sent the aforementioned hardcopy document aompanied by this Email;

 

'I Emailed You last week (6th May) asking for your opinion on several issues. I would appreciate your response to it as and when you are able (however I do acknowledge your Email to advise you would by 15/05/2015).

 

Meantime and separate to the above, I have finished composing what will be my final piece of documentation which I hope and believe will assist You in your adjudication of my case. It shall be sent 1st class Royal Mail tomorrow (Thursday) to the address I have for you which is XXXXX, Adjudicator, Financial Ombudsman Service, Exchange Tower, London, E14 9SR.

 

It is a lengthy and text-heavy document which has taken me a considerable time to compile. I would, as ever, ask you to give it your full attention.

 

Yours sincerely.....'

 

She never did reply directly regarding whether or no she could acomodate my request. I guess I was pretty foolish in thinking my 'evidence' I had sent was so strong I wouldn't need to... Then I get this letter basically telling me my 'evidence' was as good as rubbish.

 

So Dx - your thoughts?

 

I've included everything I can to tell the story so far.

 

In anticipation,

 

Openwater

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry but you really shouldn't of progressed things without getting the proof

get those SAR's done.

 

 

they you can goto the omb himself rather than the adj.

 

 

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

Should've done that regardless when you told me Dx :| - I'll start that process next week.

 

 

However, from the letter from the adjudicator,

She seemed hesitant as to whether it was possible for my case to be kept open whilst attaining the SARS.

Is this correct?

 

I've 2 further questions if you don't mind;

 

1. From what you've said, there's the adjudicator (whom I've been dealing with) -

but then is there the Ombudsman also?

Is this the 'next step' the adjudicator was eluding to?

 

2. Not connected but again, i think you may know the answer to this.

 

 

I've found physical receipts to 'Moorcroft Debt Recovery' dating back to 2003 when this all started.

Never dreamt I'd come across them but my mum's just moved house and thanks to my hoardng I've ome across them.

They are definitely payments made to my initial RBS debt. Bonus.

 

But I've also come across letters from Geoffrey Parker and Bourne solicitors from 2003

who say they are acting on behhalf of their client The National Westminster Bank.

 

 

I've also found a payment book which has dates and amounts of payments made to them by me.

Thing is, i have no recolletion of who these people are.

 

Are they in any way connected to RBS (or could they have been in 2003)?

 

Thank you in advance as ever Dx., your assistance is invaluable.

 

In anticipation,

 

Openwater

Link to post
Share on other sites

GPB were a for hire fake letterhead solicitors

often used by many DCA's to kid people into thinking they were now dealing with a solicitor

and things were getting serious

in all regard, they were basically someone allowing DCA's to use a letterhead

they got struck off.

 

the ombs is the bossman of the adj's

 

simply write back and state that, by mistake, you have not sar'd all the three parties to involved

this you are now going to do

and will obv take the 40days for the info to come

and a reasonable period to as simulate the info received.

 

you will be writing back within 6 weeks

 

if this is not within the Adj's remit

they oyu will write directly to the ombs.

 

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
  • 4 weeks later...

Hey Dx,

 

I hope you're still out there - I'm in need of some of your wisdom.

 

I've attached the response from the FOS in 4 parts (was sent in PDF so my only option was to photograph them and hope their visible). I wanted you to see exactly what they had said in their 'adjudication'.

 

I've prepared an Email response to that which I have copied below but not yet sent (waiting on your thumbs up for that).

 

My Email response;

 

'I write to inform you I now intend to issue Subject Access Requests to all three parties involved in my case, namely; Royal Bank of Scotland, Capquest and Wescott.

 

I feel that having carefully considered your adjudication I am left with no other choice.

 

I am determined to seek answers to the questions I asked of you / RBS which you advise you are not obliged to obtain on my behalf. It seems to me quite obscure that questions such as how much the initial debt was for; why I had both Capquest and Wescot pursuing me simultaneously when agreements had been set up over ten years ago and never once defaulted on etc. etc., etc do not seem to be of importance to you in your adjudication.

 

The settlement RBS have proposed to you is nowhere near what I expect in terms of a fair settlement for over a decade of harassment, threats and the negative effect this has had over the period on both me, my family, my relationships, my health and indeed my credit rating and consequent credit terms, which in real terms may have cost me thousands of pounds indirectly over the years. There is also the issue of overpayment - which you have made clear you do not believe to be the case.

 

I feel it would not be unjust for me to state that - with all due respect - I feel the huge amount of time and effort I have put in to supplying you with as much information as was humanly possible has been a waste of time. This disappoints me greatly. It seems to me (please correct me if I am wrong) that the direction your adjudication took was solely based on me providing one piece of evidence - that of payment to Capquest (or whichever trading name they operated under at the time). I have reiterated and explained at great length why this was unachievable - and also did my best to provide evidence of payment by other means such as letters from Capquest acknowledging payments had been received from me.

 

We shall also have to agree to disagree over the exact figures RBS have provided you with. I made it clear to you in previous correspondence that Wescott offered me a full and final settlement figure late last year (2014) of just over £200. Since that time (having rejected the offer due to FOS involvement) I have continued to pay £20 per month to them (via Wescot). These payments in themselves total around £200 since the offer of settlement. I note from your correspondence there is no mention of RBS refunding this. I should make it clear that since I have received no correspondence AT ALL from RBS to advise me otherwise, these payments are still active - the latest leaving my bank account on 20th July 2015.

 

In short, I do not feel your adjudication was impartial as it should be. It's seems very clear to me that very few questions have been asked of the establishments involved. On the other hand, I have spent months furnishing you with the best information available to me - all in order to attempt to show you as clearly as was possible what a complex and unfair situation these establishments have put me in. I do not believe your opinion reflects this whatsoever.

 

On a separate note, having recently helped my Mother with a house move I have come across payment receipts to two further companies, namely 'Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd' and 'Geoffrey Parker and Bourne solicitors' .

 

These payments were made to the RBS for the debt this complaint is in regards to and date back to 2003. They are definitive proof that previous to Capquest and Wescot, I had been making payments towards the debt. Again, yet another reason that the questions I hoped would be answered by FOS on my behalf - such as how much the initial debt was for - must be answered. From your correspondence however, I now believe it is down to me to obtain these answers. Again, please correct me if I am wrong.

 

I believe each organisation has 40 days to reply to my Subject Access Requests. In addition to this I shall need some time to digest the contents received. At that time I shall be back in touch.

 

I am aware this may fall out of your realm of influence and in order to save time, would request that should this be the case, my file should be passed to the Ombudsman directly for review. I hope I can assume safely that they will have full access to the extensive amount of information I have furnished you with and similarly correspondence via Email over the duration.

 

Should you have any comments or updates from either yourself or RBS please contact me immediately.

 

Sincerely,'

 

 

So Dx, hopefully you can view the attachments which constitute the FOS 'adjudication'.

You can also see my reply to that (above).

 

Before issuing the SARS to the 3 companys (Question - should I also send to Moorcroft and Geoffrey Parker and Bourne???), could I please have your thoughts? Good or bad, positive or negative.

Is my Email response good to go? Should the SARS be sent now, immediately?

 

Anything you can offer at this stage would be - as always - absolutely crucial and invaluable to me.

I have spent over 6 months on this and am determined not to give in at this late stage.

I though the FOS was the answer - then I received the adjudication.

 

You are Dx (big dramatic music....) my only hope and guidance through this.

 

Thank you a thousand times in advance.

 

Kind regards,

 

Openwater

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...