tsb DD Guarantee GB Energy/Co-Op Energy - Indemnity Claim ?

[the thinker]

hi,

 

tomlin order-

 

regards

tom2.pdf

tom1.pdf

[BankFodder]

hi

 

have you and bankfodder seen them? sorry

 

regards

 

The response from TSB is exactly as predicted.

[BankFodder]

I see that the TSB lawyers are trying to avoid the fact that you have included a claim under BCOBS. Furthermore, they are saying that even if you had, there is no right of the individual to bring their own direct action in the County Court.

 

They are completely wrong, of course and partly they are desperate to avoid a BCOBS judgement.

 

I have asked you to provide me your contact details and we will draft a letter to them but in the meantime, if the date for application for judgement arrives then I suggest that you apply for judgement immediately.

[BankFodder]

I have approved all the moderated posts because I don't see that anyone has asked for confidentiality.

 

They got a damn nerve expecting you to carry the costs of the action.

 

I've already predicted that you would have this settlement offer. I recommend that you do not accept it and that you respond to them at least insisting that all your costs are met and that the entire claim is met.

 

I think you should explain to them that you're not particularly instead the money and that you're more interested in getting the judgement against them so that you can refer them to the FCA and also to BACS – which is exactly what you should do.

 

I think there is a public interest here and there dishonouring of the direct debit guarantee should be formally notified to the relevant authorities.

[BankFodder]

I've now seen the entire letter. There is no confidentiality requirement at the top although if the OP agrees to the terms of the Tomlin order, then that would become confidential according to one of the conditions in it.

 

Personally I don't see why anybody should agree to confidentiality – especially when the defendants are so much in the wrong as this. They clearly are ashamed of what they've done and they want to cover it up. By insisting on confidentiality they would effectively prevent the matter being reported to BACs or to the FCA. I think this is unacceptable and I think that there is a public duty to report these matters to the authorities. Frankly I think that good ethical practice requires the TSB to report themselves – but but I imagine that snowflakes would fall in hell before that happened.

 

And so, amusingly they are trying to wheedle out of any BCOBS liability. This is not surprising. Our experience in the past is that the banks are quite frightened of having a BCOBS judgement against them.

 

In this case, they are trying to say that there is no direct right of action under the Direct Debit Guarantee obligations and that in this case there is also no case to be made out on the BCOBS. This is clearly untrue. Dishonouring direct debit obligations is obviously unfair treatment within the FCA regulations.

 

In terms of a right of action directly under the Direct Debit Guarantee, they are probably correct. However, the guarantee is incorporated into the banking contract and so apart from being a BCOBS breach, it would also be a breach of contract.

 

Here is part of the letter from the solicitors. I can't work out whether they really believe this stuff or they simply dream it up to mislead the banks customers who I suppose banks imagine, don't know any better. (And of course most of the time the banks are right)

 

Quite amazing that the bank is prepared to spend all of this money on some firm of solicitors somewhere when they are putting their hands up to over 650 quid and yet they want to spend money resisting a further 200 quid. It's all about face-saving. It's nothing to do about economics or commercial interests – as the bank would have you believe. They are disreputable and part of a disreputable industry. TSB is a very new bank and maybe we should be charitable and give them the benefit of the doubt and simply put it down to inexperience.

 

The DDGS is not a Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) rule which TSB can be deemed to be in

breach of, but rather it is governed and administered by Bacs Payments Schemes Limited (i.e.

bacs). You have refer.enced the Financial Services and Market Act 2000 (the Act), which does

give private individuals a right to bring an action for damages in circumstances where there has

been a breach of a FCA rule.

That is not the case here and, in any event, you have failed to detail what part of the Act or

which FCA rule you claim TSB have contravened. Moreover, you have also failed to detail what

part of the Banking Conduct of Business Sourcebook it is that you allege TSB have

contravened. As such, we consider that your claim is bound to fail.

[the thinker]

hi,

 

thanx for the reply.

 

everything u said is true and its not the money im worried about. its the fact that they wanted information which i cant get hold of,plus i got email from supplier stating this about the direct debits. ive even sent email to ceo about this also.

 

regards

[the thinker]

hi,

 

bloody cheek. tsb have given my home number to tlt.

 

regards

[BankFodder]

Yes that is a cheek. How do you know? Have they called you?

 

I'm not surprised because I have seen this kind of thing before when there is a BCOBS judgement pending. They will be anxious to try and get it tied up so they will be calling you to see if you have received their derisory offer and whether you are going to accept it.

 

If they haven't called you yet then of course you should be recording the call – but you should make it clear to them that they must put everything in writing. However, you can certainly tell them that you have no intention of accepting the offer and you can also make it clear to them that you are especially interested in getting a judgement because you intend to pass it on to the FCA and to the DDGS.

 

I expect that they will probably improve their offer on the telephone. Tell them to put in writing and that you are not prepared to discuss anything over the phone because you don't trust them.

[the thinker]

hi,

 

they phone at 1039am asking to speak to partner, i said how did u get my number? they said from our client. i said i never gave your client permission to have it as its ex directory.i told them to remove my number from there data base and put everything in writing and i hanged up on them.

 

regards

[Anus Horribilis]

I think there is a public interest here and there dishonouring of the direct debit guarantee should be formally notified to the relevant authorities.

 

Unfortunately the direct debit guarantee is now being abused by dishonest customers to instigate fraudulent clawbacks. This [problem] is encouraged by various websites and social media groups

 

They exploit the pro-consumer terms of the direct debit guarantee to falsely clawback large sums of money and then evade recovery by various "Freeman on the Land" tactics. The recommended method is to assert that there are errors in all the charged payments, but to refuse to give any details or discuss further. Just keep repeating "there are errors, refund my account" and threaten to complain or take legal action if they don't.

 

for example someone has clawed back £26,000 of mortgage payments

 

Another thread, discussing how to fraudulently recover water and energy bills, TV licence, mortgages, rent etc - packed with helpful tips about abusing the direct debit guarantee for wrongful gain -

I think it's a good thing that the banks are now approaching this more cautiously. The direct debit guarantee is a good thing for honest customers, and should be defended against fraud. Obviously I'm not referring to the OP here.

[BankFodder]

Thanks for this. I'm afraid that I've edited out your links. Any links to these kinds of sites on our forum helps improve their Google ranking and so we try to prevent at all costs.

 

Your point is very well made that there are some people on the Internet who simply try to exploit protections for ordinary honest consumers which have been put in place in good faith. When those protections such as the Direct Debit Guarantee are abused then it makes it more difficult for everyone.

 

Personally, I find the ease with which the DDG can be triggered to be a recipe for trouble. However, we are simply here to help the people who come to us to get lawful treatment from their bank and other big companies.

[the thinker]

hi,

 

two good points from above.

 

i emailed the utility company on the 20/12/2016 to provide me with dd advance notice,there reply (21/12/16) was we no longer have any information related to your dd.

i went to bank and they insisted on seeing the advance notice before applying the dd, told them these no information on my dds. i even sent a copy to banks ceo confirming this.

 

regards

[BankFodder]

Have you been checking the MoneyClaim website to see if it will allow you to apply for judgement? I suggest that you try this evening at about 5 o'clock, tomorrow morning and again tomorrow evening et cetera

[the thinker]

hi,

 

been checking morning night.

 

regards

[the thinker]

hi,

 

Ive included this to my sar-

The Investigation of All internal/external emails sent by you, All internal/external letters sent by you, Copies of any stored telephone calls into my Direct Debit Indenmity claim made on 16/12/2016.

Regards

[BankFodder]

I'm afraid that your sentence doesn't make complete sense.

If I were you I wouldn't mention the investigation specifically. I would simply ask for all personal data including internal and external correspondence, memos, notes, screen notes, telephone calls and any other personal data in any form relating to the account.

 

 

It is better to keep it simple and to keep it large. If you specify to closely watch you want, then it is easier for a company not to satisfy your SAR by finding a loophole in your request

[Anus Horribilis]

Personally, I find the ease with which the DDG can be triggered to be a recipe for trouble. However, we are simply here to help the people who come to us to get lawful treatment from their bank and other big companies.

 

We are of a mind on this. Sorry about the FMOTL links - here's a more responsible discussion of the problem. http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=11307

[the thinker]

hi,

 

Thanx for replies.

 

I have phoned bacs head office 0203 2178370 asking for the bacs best practice guide for processing of refunds book, not available to me.

 

tsbs defence is based on that which i cant get hold of.

 

regards

[BankFodder]

That's interesting. Well done on finding that out.

 

If the bank are operating on a set of guidelines that is not normally available to consumers then they can't expect to be able to rely upon that if there's a dispute. In fact the operational of secret rules would itself be a good example of unfair treatment of a consumer

[the thinker]

hi.

 

DQ sent to TSB plc on 20/02/2017

 

Regards

[BankFodder]

DQ???

[Shaken]

DQ???

 

Directions Questionnaire Form N180 (I think) I always thought that these were sent by the court to both parties.

[the thinker]

hi,

 

i think Directions questionnaire

 

Regards

[BankFodder]

I'm just amazed that they have sent you one already. The defence was only filed a couple of days ago.

[the thinker]

hi,

 

all info from mcol-

You submitted a claim on 19/01/2017 at 05:33:01

 

 

Your claim was issued on 20/01/2017

 

 

TSB plc filed an acknowledgment of service on 06/02/2017

 

 

TSB plc filed a defence on 20/02/2017

 

 

A bar was put in place for TSB plc on 20/02/2017

 

 

DQ sent to TSB plc on 20/02/2017

regards