Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Channell J in Prudential v Commissioners of Inland Revenue [1904] 2 KB 658 gives a broad definition of insurance.  Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Limited [2011] EWCA Civ 1413 confirms that extended warranties are insurance must be regulated. Over 90% certain that the parcel delivery companies parcel protection schemes are "insurance" and that they are unregulated and therefore the parcel delivery companies are committing an offence by selling it. Regulated means that the insurance is authorised but possibly exempted from certain conditions by the FCA. Notice that on all the parcel delivery companies websites, they are at great pains to avoid using the word "insurance". But in all probability that is what it is. A defence to the offence of selling unregulated insurance is that you exercised due diligence and this would mean that the parcel delivery companies would have to show that they had sought and received counsel's opinion that what they were doing is completely lawful. The fact that they are selling unregulated insurance to a certain extent is a sideshow because it still doesn't permit an exemption to section 57 of the consumer rights act. So in other words, even if it was regulated insurance – they would still be contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act and also section 72 as it is an attempt to limit or exclude liability for failure to exercise reasonable care and skill
    • Thank you for the update - at least it's all over now. I'm a bit confused by what you say happened. What did your barrister think? HB
    • Hi everyone! Thanks for all your advice during this stressful journey. Here’s a quick update of what went down today.    The court hearing itself was very quick, lasted about 5 min.  The magistrates got me to pay the amount I owe (the outstanding travel costs), as well as a fine and surcharge. They reduced the court fees from £375 to £200.  The magistrates told me the amount I need to pay but didn’t mention anything about a criminal record. Does this mean they didn’t give me any or is it implied by giving me a fine? Please let me know. Thanks!! TD 
    • Natalie, whom I assume works for Mr Schnur, emailed me to advise that "Please be advised that Parcel2Go.com is not an insurance broker and is not backed by any. We do not offer any kind of insurance policy on any of our services. We give all our customers the opportunity to cover their goods to a preferred value so that if a claim does arise, we are able to compensate them. All our claims are self-certified, and we are not a regulated company." (full copy of her email attached)  I responded:  "Good afternoon Natalie  Have you read my email below? Are you aware of the court cases of PENCHEV v P2G (225MC852) and SMIRNOVS v P2G (27MC729)? In both cases it was held by the courts that there was no need for additional ‘protection’ on top of the standard delivery charge, and P2G were required to settle both cases (by then also incurring court costs and interest) in full. This will happen again with this case if I am not recompensed in full (£265 + £9.10 = £274.10) before 1 May 2024.  Tick tock, tick tock……" 22Apr24 - email from P2G responding to my email to Schnur of 19Apr24.pdf
  • 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

Class Action Against Nationwide for unfair and discriminatory practices


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3001 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, this is my first post and I hope I can get some help to step out of this quagmire of negative discriminatory and unfair practices that I am subject to at the hands of the nefarious Nationwide Bank.

 

My issues began in 2014, when I had just over eighty-thousand-pounds+ (80.000.00 +) taken out of my account. It was an unauthorised transaction. I was abroad, I'd used my card three times with the same vendor to buy some tickets to watch some football matches.Three different games.

 

The vendor said, he'd give us some tickets the next day, and other tickets would follow a few days later as the games had not yet began.

 

The following morning, I notice that a large amount had gone from my account,

 

I rang the bank immediately on noticing the unauthorised withdrawal, Nationwide visa disputes team assured me they'd return the monies.

 

About 14 days later Nationwide returned just under fourteen-thousand-pounds (14.000.00). they said, they were dealing with the other transaction of the larger amount and it could take unto 40 days,

 

yet to this day two years later I Nationwide bank has not returned the sixty-seven-plus thousand.

 

They returned the first monies as a cash-back, and said the other transaction, all with the same company could not be returned as a cash-back

 

. I complained to them about this and asked why it had taken them 7 months to decide against their first decision. They gave various reasons for this at different times throughout the first year.

 

I called and wrote to the Financial Ombudsman(FOS) who, lo and behold, after a year found in favour of Nationwide

 

. The FOS and Nationwide said, I'd called the bank while abroad and told them to release this money. I did not,

 

I asked them to prove this by citing the Freedom Of Information Act, (FOI) neither the bank nor FOS came up with any prove,

i.e. -voice recording- saying anything of the sort.

 

after a year disputing this situation the bank and FOS,

a n FOS employee who is part of the Ombudsman's team said, I should resend in my complaint as an unauthorised transaction and not as a cash-back complaint

 

. again I duly went through the complaint process with the bank who then asked me, why did I ask for a cash-back in the first instance,

 

I replied that it was Nationwide's visa dispute team who advise me that this was a cash-back situation, but now wiser I know that this £60K+ comes under the regulations for an unauthorised transaction.

 

Thereafter Nationwide CEO's executive assistant replied and stated in writing via email, that Nationwide would not open this as a fresh claim and would NOT read any more correspondence from myself nor discuss this matter any further.

 

 

I discussed this with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) who informed me that I was being treated unfairly and that the bank was in breach on around 5 of their regulations.

 

I returned to the bank with this information and they just reiterated what they previously said, that, they would not discuss my account with me any further.

 

again returned to FOS, with this new complaint and brought in the issues about unfair practices as per FCA regulations.

 

The people I spoke with including an ombudsman at first didn't know and could not tell me the difference between a cash-back (which comes under the Consumer Credit Act 1974) and an unauthorised transaction (which is covered in the FCA handbook as BCOBS 5.1.11).

 

I asked this particular ombudsperson to look it up then come back to me so we can have a proper discussion.

 

She called me back four days later, admitting there where differences between a cash-back and an unauthorised transaction. I have this in writing too.

 

This woman ombudsman said, in the first now closed complaint, the ombudsman had thought about the unauthorised transaction aspect of this case, - though he did not refer to it in anyway in his final decision letter

 

- I asked her, is this some Orwellian double-speak, how can he say he thought about a transaction that comes under different rules and regulations, yet makes no mention of it in his final decision letter? I said again, this is a new complaint

 

. When the ombudsperson kept on referring to the old cash-back complaint. I pointed out to this ombudsperson, that it is written on the final decision letter, that FOS will no longer discuss this case again with me as I now have received the final decision letter.

 

Yet again this ombudsperson referred back to that closed case -see how they change the goal posts when it suits them- and said, I'd called the bank, which I did not,

 

I asked them to show me the prove or get the bank to show the prove that this fact is so

 

. I stated if this alleged conversation was a true fact this situation would not be into year 2 of it's investigation.

 

FOS, did not show me proof of this conversation I allegedly had with Nationwide bank and even though they had advised me to return with this new complaint,

 

they decided that the first decision on the cash-back was enough and the rules applied were the same for a cash-back as for an unauthorised transaction.

 

The FCA said this is not so....

 

Note, neither the bank nor FOS addressed the complaint(s) I had written to them about where they ARE in breach the FCA rules.

 

With all this ongoing stressful situation the bank decided to play nasty with me.

 

now, next they offered me a credit card, so I filled in the application, passed the criteria, they sent the pin and card,

 

Then they called me and asked me to go to the bank with ID to verify myself. I went in gave them my bank card told the branch staff member why I was there

 

I had on me my UK passport and utility bills, the staff member said they had to call head office,

 

I waited and waited after sitting in the bank for an hour,

 

note: they didn't ask to look at my ID or anything else,

they said, the card was revoked. They gave no explanation for this even though i called the next day, they said they would not discuss this.

 

three weeks later, I called and wrote to them asking them to explain why?

 

Nationwide then said, there was no problem with the card,

just come into branch again to verify myself with a picture ID and utility bills,

 

I did this again, and again after sitting in the bank for an hour they said, the card was blocked because I'd ask for a loan in 2007.

 

I did not do this and at that time, I was working for a government in another country which is easily proved.

 

, after leaving the bank, I called and asked what is this problem? Nationwide said just reapply and everything should go through okay.

 

I tried to reapply numerous times - called the bank in between times to make sure everything was okay on their end, Nationwide gave an affirmative answer - yet, always after completing the application the bank say's I have a card already.

 

I haven't a card as the card they issued they blocked it with no valid explanation to why.

 

I called again last week

Now, they are again refusing to discuss my account and again asked me to go to branch.

 

This time I told them, I know you are acting in a very malicious and nefarious manner and I will not go for a third time to the branch as this is just a nasty game Nationwide are playing.

 

I have written to the CEO about both these matters and I received an email from the CEO's executive assistant who stated that, on answering my complaint about 1 of the regulations of the FCA, saying Nationwide do not think they are being unfair, that they will NOT discuss my account with me and any other letters I write will be left unopened

 

. Remember, I wrote to Nationwide and FOS about them breaching 6 of the FCA's regulations.

How's that for dystopia bank style.

 

I really need some advice, and I really need some people who have know they have been unfairly treated by Nationwide bank to join me in a Class Action against them or if there is a class action happening, let me know how to join.

 

My apologies that this is such a long post, but this is a summary of a two year plus, ongoing battle with this unfair uncaring not on anyones side Nationwide bank.

 

, please if anyone has any ideas of how I can get my monies returned and how to deal with Nationwide, a bank that has shown me how vindictive, discriminatory and unhelpful they can be, I would be really grateful for workable advice.:-)

Edited by citizenB
formatting
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you sent a Subject Access request to Nationwide ?

 

Do you have copies of your credit files from the 3 agencies to see if there is any mention of the "mystery" loan ?

 

I will alert others on the site team to see if they can offer any advice on what you should be doing.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb 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.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi citizenB, thank you for your reply.

 

I have sent for a Subject Access Request.

 

I am still awaiting the reply.

 

I also keep a regular check on my credit files

 

. I have 3 other credit cards, and no there is no mention of this mystery loan

 

. Also, I am very grateful to you for alerting others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you mean charge back..not cash back??

 

We rarely find class actions work

 

Its always better to issue lots of individual claimforms

 

I'd await the sat return

 

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 dx100uk, thank you for your response.

 

Yes, I did mean to say charge-back not cash-back.

 

What is a clanfron?

 

Also my situation with Nationwide in regards to the £60k+ is not predicate on the SAR.

 

 

Is this what you mean by awaiting the sat return.

 

I would argue, Class Actions do work.

 

 

I have some signatories already and a brilliant legal team ready to go forward.

 

I think there is a lack of understanding of how powerful and effective this action can be when presented effectively.

 

Anyone who wishes to join will not need to pay towards this action.

 

Mindfulness

Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant claimform.

 

 

predictive text again was not on my usual system!!

 

 

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

Send a sar to fos as well.

 

Keep off the phone and put any communication in writing.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro 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

How long have you been waiting for the sar?

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for that Caro.:-)

 

Some people have found banks etc have provided info to fos that has not been included in the sar info from the bank plus you get notes etc the bank don't have.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro 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

Hi renegadeimp,

I have been waiting about three weeks for the SAR.

 

Still another 20 ish days to wait then

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still another 20 ish days to wait then

 

I am not surprised about the length of time receiving an SAR takes.

I think in the UK most financial institutions like banks, count on the fact people don't or won't complain.

For those who do, they figure if they can keep one in litigation for years then the complainant will give up or disappear.

Forums like these - though for myself haven't given me anything new, though it's early days:-) are good for discussing possibilities.

The Class Action will go a long way to showing bankster, that the days of treating customers badly is coming to an end.

 

Anyhow, thanks for your response renegade imp.

 

Thanks to those who upkeep this site and to all who contribute.

 

"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits." — SIR JOSIAH STAMP, (President of the Bank of England in the 1920's, the second richest man in Britain):

Link to post
Share on other sites

To add, you dont need to do a class action suit. A decent solicitor would likely have picked this up pro bono as it looks to be a sure fire win. Although when you recieve the sar youll be in a better position to see the legal side.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

To add, you dont need to do a class action suit. A decent solicitor would likely have picked this up pro bono as it looks to be a sure fire win. Although when you recieve the sar youll be in a better position to see the legal side.

 

Hi renegadeimp,

 

You are correct about a lawyer willing to take this on.

I wish to go with the Class Action, because like the people who started this site, I feel very strongly about the way banks lie, cheat, manipulate and down right act criminal towards their clients. We need to get back to some sort of mutual respect. Yet, I sometimes wonder have the banks ever respected their members, us, who in actuality are the one's who keep their businesses going? So if I can help others get justice from the banksters, then I will do my best to do what I can.

 

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.

Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The

issuing power (of money) should be taken away from the banks and restored to the people to

whom it properly belongs." — Thomas Jefferson, U.S. President

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe this is the link to the Ombudsman's decision: http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/viewPDF.aspx?FileID=92842

 

I was abroad, I'd used my card three times with the same vendor to buy some tickets to watch some football matches.Three different games.

 

You said you used your card with the vendor which means you willing took part in the transaction and therefore the transaction cannot possibly be unauthorised.

 

The vendor said, he'd give us some tickets the next day, and other tickets would follow a few days later as the games had not yet began.

 

 

The following morning, I notice that a large amount had gone from my account,

 

I rang the bank immediately on noticing the unauthorised withdrawal, Nationwide visa disputes team assured me they'd return the monies.

 

About 14 days later Nationwide returned just under fourteen-thousand-pounds (14.000.00). they said, they were dealing with the other transaction of the larger amount and it could take unto 40 days,

 

yet to this day two years later I Nationwide bank has not returned the sixty-seven-plus thousand.

 

They returned the first monies as a cash-back, and said the other transaction, all with the same company could not be returned as a cash-back

 

If you disagreed with the amount or didn't receive your goods then this would be a disputed transaction which can potentially be remedied through a chargeback.

 

However, this is subject to certain conditions. I can see from the Ombudsman's decision that you didn't provide sufficient evidence to support your claim that the price you agreed to was different and that you only received a portion of your tickets.

 

I complained to them about this and asked why it had taken them 7 months to decide against their first decision. They gave various reasons for this at different times throughout the first year.

 

I called and wrote to the Financial Ombudsman(FOS) who, lo and behold, after a year found in favour of Nationwide

 

. The FOS and Nationwide said, I'd called the bank while abroad and told them to release this money. I did not,

 

I asked them to prove this by citing the Freedom Of Information Act, (FOI) neither the bank nor FOS came up with any prove,

i.e. -voice recording- saying anything of the sort.

 

This wouldn't be covered by the Freedom of Information Act.

You could possibly get this information using the Data Protection Act by raising a SAR.

 

after a year disputing this situation the bank and FOS,

a n FOS employee who is part of the Ombudsman's team said, I should resend in my complaint as an unauthorised transaction and not as a cash-back complaint

 

. again I duly went through the complaint process with the bank who then asked me, why did I ask for a cash-back in the first instance,

 

I replied that it was Nationwide's visa dispute team who advise me that this was a cash-back situation, but now wiser I know that this £60K+ comes under the regulations for an unauthorised transaction.

 

Thereafter Nationwide CEO's executive assistant replied and stated in writing via email, that Nationwide would not open this as a fresh claim and would NOT read any more correspondence from myself nor discuss this matter any further.

 

 

I discussed this with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) who informed me that I was being treated unfairly and that the bank was in breach on around 5 of their regulations.

 

I returned to the bank with this information and they just reiterated what they previously said, that, they would not discuss my account with me any further.

 

again returned to FOS, with this new complaint and brought in the issues about unfair practices as per FCA regulations.

 

This concerns a disputed transaction not an unauthorised transaction therefore I do not believe Nationwide were wrong to decline to take this on as a separate complaint.

 

The people I spoke with including an ombudsman at first didn't know and could not tell me the difference between a cash-back (which comes under the Consumer Credit Act 1974) and an unauthorised transaction (which is covered in the FCA handbook as BCOBS 5.1.11).

 

In actual fact, chargebacks are covered by the card issuers rules (i.e. the Visa Europe Operating Regulations) not the Consumer Credit Act. Unauthorised transactions are covered by the Payment Services Regulations not BCOBS.

 

...

 

I think you would be better off taking action against the vendor that sold you the tickets as opposed to Nationwide.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people have found banks etc have provided info to fos that has not been included in the sar info from the bank plus you get notes etc the bank don't have.

true. in one eg, a request of the fos file revealed copy correspondence that the bank (different bank) gave to the fos as having been sent to the customer, which actually was not the same as that sent to the customer!

Link to post
Share on other sites

chargeback is only good for the initial payment

 

 

the rest were taken via the continuous Payment Authority the above set up.

 

 

I cant see you've made a complaint about CPA

so .........

 

 

CPA complaints goto the FCA

 

 

see what you can extract from this file of useful bits I've collected.

 

 

GENERAL NOTES ON CHARGEBACK & Continuous Payment Authority & BACS

.....

We have been telling people to put a letter into their bank instructing them

not to make any payments under any circumstances to these companies

.

http://whatconsumer.co.uk/visa-debit-chargeback/- it works!

usually this should be done using the number on your debit card

.

banks MUST follow written intructions from their customers !

.

CANCELLING YOUR DEBIT CARD DOES NOT STOP CPA'S

.

This fsa guide has now been updated:

.

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/static/pubs/consumer_info/know_your_rights_guide.pdf

http://www.fca.org.uk/news/continuous-payment-authorities-your-right-to-cancel

.

Here's the text:

.

Cancelling a regular

card payment:

.

When you give your credit or debit card details to a company and authorise them to take regular payments from your account,

such as for a gym membership or magazine subscription,

it is known as a ‘recurring transaction’ or ‘continuous payment authority’.

.

These are often confused with direct debits, but do not offer the same guarantee if the amount or date of the payment changes.

.

In most cases, regular payments can be cancelled by telling the company taking the payments.

.

However,

you have the right to cancel them directly with your bank or card issuer by telling it that you have stopped permission for the payments.

Your bank or card issuer must then stop them – it has no right to insist that you agree this first with the company taking the payments.

.

Be aware, though, that you will still be responsible for paying any money that you owe.

and that CANELLING YOUR CARD WILL NOT STOP THE CPA

.

..

.

New june 2013

.

Regulator orders Banks and mutuals to review complaints about not cancelling recurring payments from November 2009.

.

Consumers who have set up a regular payment from their account will now be able to successfully cancel that arrangement

by contacting their card provider, the Financial Conduct Authority said.

.

The FCA has been examining how easy it is for customers to cancel Continuous Payment Authorities (CPAs)

due either to payday lendersicon or for other regular payments such as subscriptions or gymicon memberships.

.

CPAs, which are also commonly called recurring transactions or recurring payments,

are relatively easy to set up but can be hard to cancel, causing problems for consumers trying to manage their finances,the FCA said.

.

Now, following the FCA review of how the largest high street banks and mutuals process requests to cancel CPAs, they have agreed that they will ensure that when

a customer asks for a recurring payment to end, that will be sufficient to cancel the arrangement. They have also confirmed that should a payment go through by

mistake following cancellation by a customer the customer will be refunded immediately.

.

In addition to securing this commitment, the largest banks and mutuals have agreed to review every individual complaint they have received about the non-

cancellation of a CPA and to pay redress where payments have continued to be made despite the customer cancelling the arrangement. This applies to all complaints

since November 2009 when the Financial Services Authority, the FCA’s predecessor, began regulating banking conduct.

.

Clive Adamson, the FCA’s director of supervision, said: “It’s important that consumers are confident that banks are meeting their everyday banking needs. Today

customers can be confident that when they ask for a Continuous Payment Authority to be cancelled – it will be cancelled - and that it can be done easily.

.

“We recognise that historically this is an area where some customers have struggled but the banks and mutuals have responded positively to our work on this issue.

From now on we expect them to be getting this right. In addition, they have committed to review past complaints.”

.

.

Also mentioned your displeasure that as whomever took your money had obviously attempted this many times

probably activating your banks own anti fraud software - nobody had the decency to inform my you this was going on.?

.

.In the FSA's own words:

.

..

What should I do about a payment from my account that I didn’t authorise?

.

Your bank must refund an unauthorised transaction.

Money can only be taken from your account if you have authorised the transaction

or if your bank can prove you were at fault –

.

see below.

Contact your bank immediately if you notice an unauthorised payment from your account.

.

If you are sure you did not authorise the payment, you can claim a refund.

.

However, your bank does not have to refund you if you do not tell it about the payment until 13 months

or more after the date it left your account.

.

Your bank must refund an unauthorised transaction

.

------------------

.

Your bank may only refuse a refund for an unauthorised transaction if:

.

? it can prove you authorised the transaction

– though your bank cannot simply say that use of your password,

card and PIN proves you authorised a payment; or

.

? it can prove you are at fault because you acted fraudulently,

or because you deliberately,

or with gross negligence, failed to protect the details of your card, PIN or password in a way that allowed the transaction

.

-----------------------

.

How quickly must my bank refund me for an unauthorised transaction?

.

The bank must make the refund immediately unless it has evidence that one of the above reasons applies.

Your bank may ask you to answer some questions and fill out a form confirming what has happened,

but it cannot delay your refund while it waits for you to return the form.

If the bank has evidence that one of the above reasons for refusing a refund applies,

it may investigate before making a refund

but must look into it as quickly as possible.

If your bank rejects your claim for a refund it should explain why.

If the transaction was on a credit card, the refund may not happen immediately.

But the card issuer cannot charge interest or ask for repayment of the amount unless it can prove you are liable to pay

 

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

on a side note

 

 

I would never ever keep that amount of money in a bank account that can simply be drained with a cloned card or skimming device anyway.

 

 

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 dx100uk,

 

Really grateful for your response, especially in regards to the unauthorised transaction.

In relation to FOS, the representatives I've dealt with really and truly have no clue about Banking rules and regulations,

and/or the pool of advisors they pick from are non-critical thinkers with a high school level of understanding.

(Not that I'm saying all high schoolers are unable to critically think on a higher level of business, yet, for most it is a matter of training.)

FOS, just don't appear have the staff who are experts in Banking regulations and if they do, then they surely work for the banks to subvert justice for the consumer.

 

I been given advice regarding the criteria my circumstances need to fit, to fulfil the necessary criteria of the bank's rules and regulations when things go wrong.

I have checked and had this matter rechecked by people who spend their lives dealing with these situations. Also, thanks for your insight too.

 

Also, in answer to your later post, banks say one's money is safe with them yes?, Now, if I'd have know that was an advertising lie, I'd have dug an hole in the wall where my money would have been safer.

 

The Nationwide bank has been negligent in their actions in regards to doing what they say contractually in regards to safe guarding my deposits.

They are now acting in a wilful and malicious manner, so I will continue to work towards justice for myself and others who find themselves in such situations where a bank disregards what is the law of the land.

 

I would add, nationwide used to be head and shoulders above other high street banks hence why I banked with them, I would argue this is not true of them any longer.. Also there are many nationwide staffers who are better than the organisation they represent. I always thank them for their work.

 

Again, I am grateful to those who care about consumer rights like yourself and those who contribute helpful advice on this site.

 

“Rather than justice for all, we are evolving into a system of justice for those who can afford it. We have banks that are not only too big to fail, but too big to be held accountable.”

― Joseph E. Stiglitz

Link to post
Share on other sites

that's why as my post indicates

you should complain to the FCA

FOS are useless with regard to banking. in many aspects.

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

that's why as my post indicates

you should complain to the FCA

FOS are useless with regard to banking. in many aspects.

 

Hi dx100uk,

 

I agree with what you've stated, and will look at complaining to the FCA.

When I've rang in the past or looked at their website, I've not seen where I can complain, yet with due-diligence I will look again and thanks for that gem of advice.

 

From reading the banks 'rules and regulations' it is obvious that from the jargon used, their intentions are to obsfucate the definitive legal purpose wherein complaints are settled fairly, justly. I now see, one needs to look carefully at the true statistics concerning outcomes of complaint procedures, wherein the consumer is concerned, on viewing people will know without doubt what the banks true intentions are, as it is the same with agencies such as FOS.

 

"One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.”

― Milton Friedman

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...