Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Oddly enough I took a look at my daughters bag   I don't think theyre made to last anymore   
    • Many, many thanks.  That is genuinely useful.     The lender was Natwest.  I am fairly sure they will owe me something one way or another, but they do seem surprisingly keen to cooperate so far.  Also Barclaycard.  I think they may have decided it is a lost cause from their point of view.  So, they might as well try and score a few brownie points for customer service.
    • probably far too old and mostly in those days [pre 1990's] no-one was regulated anyway. the real changes like GISC and ABI didnt come in till later and they only regulated the insurance co's.   not sure what rules existed on mortgages back then but the only thing you must have inplace certainly since the 2000's in buildings ins if you didn't already have it. so being charged home [contents ins] as a compulsory term of your mortgage could be a no-no.  and can all be reclaimed.   there was a case not so long ago of home ins going back to I think it was 1992 from today and the couple got over £50k back ithink.   sar to your original lender might be the only chance of getting paperwork.  
    • So I'm the one that's paying the mortgage for my kids to have a home so I have to let them no what goes in and comes out and pay them payments with my card so he just authorized me to talk to them when he ohones as they always have to as me questions and what not
  • Our picks

    • Future Comms issues. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/416504-future-comms-issues/
      • 3 replies
    • This is a bit of a lengthy one but I’ll summerise best as possible.
      I was contacted by future comms by phone, they stated that they could beat any phone contract I have , (I am a limited company but just myself that needs a business phone and I am the only worker) 
      I told future comms my deal, £110 per month with a phone and a virtual landline, they confirmed that they could beat that, £90 per month with a phone , virtual landline  they also confirmed they would pay Vodafone (previous provider) the termination fee. As I am in business, naturally I was open to making a deal. So we proceeded. 
      Future comms then revealed that the contract would be with PLAN.COM and the airtime would be provided by 02, I instantly told them that this would break the deal as I have poor 02 signal in the house where I live as my partner is on 02 and constantly complaining about bad signal
      the salesman assured me he would send a signal booster box out with the phone so I would have perfect signal.
      so far so good.....
      i then explained this is the only mobile phone I use for business and pleasure, so therefore I didn’t want any disconnection time in the slightest between the switchover from Vodafone to 02
      the salesman then confirmed that the existing phone would only be disconnected once the new phone was switched on.
      so far so good....
      • 14 replies
    • A shocking story of domestic and economic abuse compounded by @BarclaysUKHelp ‏ bank complicity – coming soon @A_Gentle_Woman. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/415737-a-shocking-story-of-domestic-and-economic-abuse-compounded-by-barclaysukhelp-%E2%80%8F-bank-complicity-%E2%80%93-coming-soon-a_gentle_woman/
      • 0 replies
    • The FSA has announced large fines against DB UK Bank Limited (trading as DB Mortgages) - DeutscheBank and also against Redstone for their unfair treatment of their customers.
      Please see the links below for summaries and full details from the FSA website.
      It is now completely clear that any arrears charges which exceed actual administrative costs are unfair and therefore unlawful.
      Furthemore, irresponsible lending practices are also unfair and unlawful.
      Additionally there are other unfair practices including unarranged counsellor visits - even if they have been attempted.
      You are entitled to refuse counsellor visits and not incur any charges.
      Any charges for counsellor visits must not seek to make profits. The cost of the visits must be passed on to you at cost price.
      We are hearing stories of people being charged for counsellor visits for which there is no evidence that they were even attempted.
      It is clear that some mortgage lenders are trying to cheat you out of your money.
      You should ascertain how much has been taken from you and claim it back. The chances of winning are better than 90%. It is highly likely that the lender will attempt to avoid court action and offer you back your money.
      However, you should ensure that you receive a proper rate of interest and this means that you should be seeking at least restitutionary damages - which would be much higher than the statutory 8%.
      Furthermore, you should assess whether the paying of demands for unlawful excessive charges has also out you further into arrears and if this has caused you further penalties in terms of extra interest or any other prejudice. This should be claimed as well.
      If excessive unlawful charges have resulted in your credit file being affected, then you should take this into account also when working out exactly what you want by way of remedy from the lender.
      You should consult others on these forums when considering any offer.
      You must not make any complaint through the Ombudsman. your time will be wasted, you will wait up to 2 yrs and there will be a minimal 8% award of interest and no account will be taken of any other damage you have suffered.
      You must make your complaint through the County Court for a rapid and effective remedy.

      Do you have a mortage arears claim to make? Then post your story on the forum here
        • Like
      • 0 replies

Mastercard £14bn lawsuit success - get reclaiming - did you buy using the card? - you could be owed £100's in Fess back

Recommended Posts

Mastercard (MA) faces the possibility of a £14bn ($18.2bn) lawsuit after the Court of Appeal in London made a surprise ruling.

And nearly every British adult could get a payout of up to £300.

That court said that the Competition Appeal Tribunal must reconsider the class action against the payments firm after it initially threw out that lawsuit two years ago.

The claim, which was brought on by the former financial ombudsman Walter Merricks, alleges that 46 million people unduly paid higher prices in shops due to high card fees. The class action was brought on behalf of people who were resident in the UK for at least three months between 1992 and 2008, we aged over 16, and who bought an item or service from a UK business which accepted Mastercard.







please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.



Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...