Black Horse Ppi & Unexecuted Agreement

[stan5131]

I am on the dootstep of issuing action against Blackhorse for the return of almost £9,000 PPI on a £25,000 which my friend took out. There are also penalty charges which need to be reclaimed.

 

Blackhorse took 3 months to comply with SAR request. Interestingly, the copy agreement sent was not executed (no company signature in box). However, when I wrote requesting refund of PPI, they sent a copy of the Demands and Needs form they had completed over the phone and another copy of the agreement, which miraculously now has a signature in the box! My friend took this loan out over 10 years but repaid it in full after 2 years when she shold her house (loan was secured).

 

Even though the Demands and Needs form has self employed circled, they go on to recommend just critical illness for the extortionate sum of nearly £9k. My friend didnt even know she had this PPI. It was only discovered when we got a copy of the agreement with the SAR.

[stan5131]

29th April 2007

LETTER BEFORE COURT ACTION

BlackHorse

116 Cockfosters Road

Holbrook

Hertford

EN4 0DY

 

For the attn of S. Patel, Complaints Analyst

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Agreement Number 351453386

PPI Policy and Penalty Charges

 

Further to your letter dated 23rd April, 2007, I am disappointed that you are not willing to refund the Payment Protection Insurance which was mis-sold to me.

 

With regard to the ‘Demands & Needs’ form please note the following; I do not, at any time, recall answering any of the alleged questions in relation to PPI. If these questions were indeed asked, then I was certainly not clear that they related specifically to PPI and assumed that these question were in relation to the loan itself. Further, the questionnaire is designed to ‘recommend’ cover. I also notice that ‘self employed’ is circled on the questionnaire! In such instances, this questionnaire then goes on to ‘recommend’ cover that only provides for accident/critical illness. There is no provision on the form for advising the customer that a ‘single premium’ policy is then added to the loan and interest charged in addition. There is also no record on the form of my being advised of the extortionate total cost of £8,819.16 which does not even cover unemployment. In comparison, Virgin Money are offering sickness/accident/critical illness cover for £7 per month.

 

In addition, the ‘Demands & Needs’ form does not give other competitive options or inform the customer of their options. Nowhere on the form is there mention of the cost or how it is applied. There are also no questions on the form relating to pre existing medical conditions or any esclusions. Further, the loan was repaid some 8 years early. It had always been my intention to repay the loan early as my move from Leeds to Birmingham was inevitable and thus the sale of my property enabled early repayment.. The questions on your ‘Demands & Needs’ form made no provision to enquire about the possibility of early settlement and that a single premium policy was totally unsuitable.

 

FSA Factsheet:

 

What we would expect a compliant demands and needs statement for an advised sale to cover (with relevant FSA rule references)

 

* The customer’s demands and needs (ICOB 4.41®(a)6). For example this should include the advisors assessment of whether the customer has other insurance in place that affects their needs, including employer benefits; the need for the future flexibility if relevant; and so on

 

* Reasons for recommending a particular PPI contract (ICOB 4.41R(1)(c )). This should set out why the recommendation contract suits based on that particular customers needs. For example, it should explain why the recommendation is suitable considering the costs of the contract if relevant (ICOB 4.3.6R(2)7) and the exclusion and limits of the contract (ICOB 4.3.6R(3)).

 

* Demands and needs not met by the recommended contract. The statement of demands and needs is the record that you must keep to show that you have made a suitable recommendation (ICOB 4.4.5G). You should consider recording the demands and needs of the customer the personal recommendation doesn’t meet (ICOB 4.3.1R(3)(b)). For example, if the customer needs future flexibility you may wish to explain the constraints on this ( for example, refunds of premium not being available or not being on pro rata basis.

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

 

It is evident that your ‘Demands & Needs’ form is structured in such a way as to highlight the benefits of PPI without mentioning the extortionate cost or the many exclusions. I also notice that the customer signature box does not contain my signature but the words ‘postal’. I have never (not even as part of my Subject Access Request) received any policy documents or terms and conditions of the policy.

 

With regard to the Agreement itself. Can you please clarify to me why the copy of my Agreement which was sent earlier this month as part of my Subject Access Request is not properly executed as does not contain a signature on behalf of your company….. Yet the copy Agreement which accompanied your letter of 23rd April 2007 miraculously does! There are also other ‘recent’ alterations which have been made to the Agreement. The signature that ‘now’ appears on the Agreement has been dated 28/01/05. Given the seriousness of this matter, I expect your immediate comments.

 

 

 

Penalty Charges: I would like to query the following entries on the statements:

Unpaid Returned £ 15.00

Collection Activity Charge £300.00

 

As you are not doubt, aware, penalty charges are unlawful and unenforceable in a court of law. I am requesting that you issue a full refund of the £315.00 without delay. I am also requesting that you confirm that these were the ‘only’ penalty charges imposed as this figure does not tally with my records. Please also confirm whether additional interest was imposed by way of a penalty charge and, if so, full details and amounts.

 

With regard to my Subject Access Request. The loan account in question was a secondary loan and the first loan was consolidated. You have not sent any information in relation to the first loan. This should have been covered within my original Subject Access Request. You are obliged, by law, to send all information which you hold on me. Please rectify this matter by providing the information as a matter of urgency. Until this has been received, you have not complied with my request.

 

In light of the above, I am allowing 28 days for you to issue a full refund of the mis-sold PPI and all penalty charges imposed. I also expect a full response to all other queries outlined above within the 28 days.

 

Be in no doubt that at the expiry of the 28 days deadline I will, without further notice, issue action against you in the County Court for the full amount together with statutory interest, costs and damages/compensation.

 

Yours faithfully,

[hellhasnofury]

29th April 2007

LETTER BEFORE COURT ACTION

BlackHorse

116 Cockfosters Road

Holbrook

Hertford

EN4 0DY

 

For the attn of S. Patel, Complaints Analyst

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Agreement Number 351453386

PPI Policy and Penalty Charges

 

Further to your letter dated 23rd April, 2007, I am disappointed that you are not willing to refund the Payment Protection Insurance which was mis-sold to me.

 

With regard to the ‘Demands & Needs’ form please note the following; I do not, at any time, recall answering any of the alleged questions in relation to PPI. If these questions were indeed asked, then I was certainly not clear that they related specifically to PPI and assumed that these question were in relation to the loan itself. Further, the questionnaire is designed to ‘recommend’ cover. I also notice that ‘self employed’ is circled on the questionnaire! In such instances, this questionnaire then goes on to ‘recommend’ cover that only provides for accident/critical illness. There is no provision on the form for advising the customer that a ‘single premium’ policy is then added to the loan and interest charged in addition. There is also no record on the form of my being advised of the extortionate total cost of £8,819.16 which does not even cover unemployment. In comparison, Virgin Money are offering sickness/accident/critical illness cover for £7 per month.

 

In addition, the ‘Demands & Needs’ form does not give other competitive options or inform the customer of their options. Nowhere on the form is there mention of the cost or how it is applied. There are also no questions on the form relating to pre existing medical conditions or any esclusions. Further, the loan was repaid some 8 years early. It had always been my intention to repay the loan early as my move from Leeds to Birmingham was inevitable and thus the sale of my property enabled early repayment.. The questions on your ‘Demands & Needs’ form made no provision to enquire about the possibility of early settlement and that a single premium policy was totally unsuitable.

 

FSA Factsheet:

 

What we would expect a compliant demands and needs statement for an advised sale to cover (with relevant FSA rule references)

 

* The customer’s demands and needs (ICOB 4.41®(a)6). For example this should include the advisors assessment of whether the customer has other insurance in place that affects their needs, including employer benefits; the need for the future flexibility if relevant; and so on

 

* Reasons for recommending a particular PPI contract (ICOB 4.41R(1)(c )). This should set out why the recommendation contract suits based on that particular customers needs. For example, it should explain why the recommendation is suitable considering the costs of the contract if relevant (ICOB 4.3.6R(2)7) and the exclusion and limits of the contract (ICOB 4.3.6R(3)).

 

* Demands and needs not met by the recommended contract. The statement of demands and needs is the record that you must keep to show that you have made a suitable recommendation (ICOB 4.4.5G). You should consider recording the demands and needs of the customer the personal recommendation doesn’t meet (ICOB 4.3.1R(3)(b)). For example, if the customer needs future flexibility you may wish to explain the constraints on this ( for example, refunds of premium not being available or not being on pro rata basis.

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

 

It is evident that your ‘Demands & Needs’ form is structured in such a way as to highlight the benefits of PPI without mentioning the extortionate cost or the many exclusions. I also notice that the customer signature box does not contain my signature but the words ‘postal’. I have never (not even as part of my Subject Access Request) received any policy documents or terms and conditions of the policy.

 

With regard to the Agreement itself. Can you please clarify to me why the copy of my Agreement which was sent earlier this month as part of my Subject Access Request is not properly executed as does not contain a signature on behalf of your company….. Yet the copy Agreement which accompanied your letter of 23rd April 2007 miraculously does! There are also other ‘recent’ alterations which have been made to the Agreement. The signature that ‘now’ appears on the Agreement has been dated 28/01/05. Given the seriousness of this matter, I expect your immediate comments.

 

 

 

Penalty Charges: I would like to query the following entries on the statements:

Unpaid Returned £ 15.00

Collection Activity Charge £300.00

 

As you are not doubt, aware, penalty charges are unlawful and unenforceable in a court of law. I am requesting that you issue a full refund of the £315.00 without delay. I am also requesting that you confirm that these were the ‘only’ penalty charges imposed as this figure does not tally with my records. Please also confirm whether additional interest was imposed by way of a penalty charge and, if so, full details and amounts.

 

With regard to my Subject Access Request. The loan account in question was a secondary loan and the first loan was consolidated. You have not sent any information in relation to the first loan. This should have been covered within my original Subject Access Request. You are obliged, by law, to send all information which you hold on me. Please rectify this matter by providing the information as a matter of urgency. Until this has been received, you have not complied with my request.

 

In light of the above, I am allowing 28 days for you to issue a full refund of the mis-sold PPI and all penalty charges imposed. I also expect a full response to all other queries outlined above within the 28 days.

 

Be in no doubt that at the expiry of the 28 days deadline I will, without further notice, issue action against you in the County Court for the full amount together with statutory interest, costs and damages/compensation.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

Hello Stan

 

Excellent letter:D

 

Straight to the point polite, but firm

[stan5131]

Thank you Hell. I am going to have a play around with the POC which you posted on Tanz's thread. Will post here when done.

[TANZARELLI]

Will be doing Black Horse myself also want default removed too. So will subscribe to this on stan

 

Tanz

[stan5131]

Thanks Tanz..... we do battle together again!! lol

 

Another p[oint about the SAR from Blackhorse. There are pages of screen notes from which it is evident that they did a credit check when she fell into arrears. From the notes they were assessing whether or not to repossess and the words "do credit check" appears. Then they list all her creditors ie credit cards and amounts owing etc.

 

I have read much conflicting stuff on this. Some say they cant do a credit check without your permission and others say if you already have an account with them, they can!

[donbracho]

hello there just subscribing as bh are scandalous received sar info other day was told over phone that collection activity charges would continue even though paying agreed amounts weekly and defaults can be issued as well regadless !

[alibobsy]

Subscribing to this thread as well as I am just about to start a claim for ppi against Black Horse. Off to start my own thread

ali x

[stan5131]

Guys, I am on holiday on Friday for a week so will not be able to post any updates til im back.

[TANZARELLI]

Have a goon one stan, do you want me to keep an eye on the horse while your away. lol

[stan5131]

Tanz, lots of hay and plenty of apples - and dont forget your wellies lol

[TANZARELLI]

Tanz, lots of hay and plenty of apples - and dont forget your wellies lol

 

 

lol

 

Will do.

[stan5131]

Received letter yesterday from Black Horse claiming PPI was not mis sold and charges fair and reasonable. Totally ignored all questions raised in my letter. Prelim on its way.

[TANZARELLI]

Received letter yesterday from Black Horse claiming PPI was not mis sold and charges fair and reasonable. Totally ignored all questions raised in my letter. Prelim on its way.

 

 

Nice one stan, how was the holiday? Horse was fine, ate all the apples.

[stan5131]

Cheers Tanz. Holiday was fab. Batteries fully charged! Let battle commence.

[nicho1120]

Hi there Stan 5131,

 

I have had exactly the same problem as you with regards to PPI. I had the Demands and needs carried out on me and they answered questions for me with regards to my health without even asking me the question. I queried this with Mr Patel also and he basically said that I had signed the sheet so understood what I was signing for even though I hadnt answered any of the questions personally. I wrote reply to Mr Patel telling him that he had not answered any of my questions as to how the person filling in the Demands and needs knew anything about my previous health. I have had no further reply from him and that was back in February. I want to take it further but not sure who to write to. I thought I had read that the FSA were looking into mis sold PPI. Do you think it is worth getting contact with them.Also does anybody know of any of the top bosses at Black Horse so I can take it up with them.

[stan5131]

Hi Nicho. Yes, it is definitely worth taking it up with FSA. I personally am going to file a county court action against them, only because it will be quicker. The OFT are also an option. They recently made a statement that they following an extensive survey, the found evidence of mis selling PPI.

http://www.wragge.com/files/Commission_publishes_final_report_BN_0207.pdf

 

Recently, GE Capital and Capital One were heavily fined by the OFT for the mis selling of PPI. We all know it goes on. So many people have taken out loans with Black Horse and have PPI that they didnt even know about.

 

Do not let them get away with it.

[stan5131]

Update.

 

Received reply from the lovely Mr. Patel explaining that two copies of the agreement are held on file. One is executed and the other copy is pre executed!!!!! They just happened to send me three separate copies of the unexecuted agreement but assure me that they also had the executed agreement on file which was signed and dated in 2004.

 

Also received the remainder of the SAR request. It would seem that my friend had six loans with Black Horse over the last few years. Each loan consolidated the previous loan and the last four loans contained PPI of which she had no knowledge.

 

The next post contains my reply. This is STAGGERING stuff!! When working out the PPI on the loans, I could hardly believe what I was reading:

[stan5131]

4th June 2007

 

Black Horse Ltd

116 Cockfosters Road

Holbrook House

Cockfosters

Hertfordshire

EN4 0DY

 

For the attn of S. Patel, Complaints Analyst

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Re: Agreement No’s: 351335136, 351380315, 351408665 and 35145338

Payment Protection Policies and Unlawful Penalty Charges

 

Further to your letter dated 29th May 2007. Firstly, I fail to agree with the comments of your second paragraph relating to the unexecuted agreement. I requested a copy of the original executed agreement relating to 35145338. This was sent to me on three separate occasions by yourselves showing no company signature. Some time into the handling of my complaint, I am then sent a copy which subsequently shows your company signature. However, there is no need for you to respond further on this subject as this is something on which the courts will have to decide.

Under separate cover, I have now received copies of all other agreements you hold on file for me. After much perusal, frankly I am outraged by their content. I am enclosing a Schedule of the Payment Protection Policies which you have mis sold to me which totals a staggering £15,514.64 (which includes £75 of unlawful penalty charges). I would like to outline each individual agreement:

 

1) On 8th January 2002 I took out a loan with yourselves for £2,000 over 3 years. You sold me a Payment Protection Policy which totalled £486.20. This was a single premium up front policy and included interest. This loan was repaid some 18 months early.

 

2) On 28th June 2003 I consolidated the above loan and took out a loan with yourselves for £7,000 over 5 years. You sold me a Payment Protection Policy which totalled £2,099.40. This was a single premium up front policy and included interest. This loan was repaid after 9 months - over 4 years early.

 

3) On 4th March 2004 I consolidated the above loan and took out a loan with yourselves for £12,000 over 6 years. You sold me a Payment Protection Policy which totalled £4,034.88. This was a single premium up front policy and included interest. This loan was repaid after 9 months - over 5 years early.

 

4) On 29th December 2004 I consolidated the above loan and took out a loan with yourselves for £25,000 over 7 years. You sold me a Payment Protection Policy which totalled £8,819.16. This was a single premium up front policy and included interest. This loan was repaid after 22 months - over 5 years early.

 

With regard to loan (1), I had been with my employer for some ten years. I enjoyed the benefit of full sick pay for 6 months, then half pay for a further 6 months. This policy not only should never have been sold to me, but was totally unsuitable for my needs. Further, I was not even aware of its existence.

 

With regard to 2,3 and 4. I was self employed when these loans were taken. Therefore any Payment Protection Policy would have covered critical illness only. These policies were extortionately expensive and I was totally unaware of their existence.

 

I would remind you that you have a duty of care to your customers. Payment Protection Policies should fit the needs and demands of each and every customer. Each policy and the cost of each policy should be properly explained to the customer. The terms, conditions and exclusions should also be properly explained. Also, a copy of the terms, conditions and exclusions should be sent to the customer. I have never at any time, received any such documentation.

 

Given my financial history with yourselves, and given that all loans were repaid exceptionally early, I believe a pattern of early settlement was evident. Yet, you continued to sell/recommend totally inappropriate insurance. Single premium policies are non refundable in the event of early settlement.

 

As an example, you sold me a Payment Protection Policy on 4th March 2004 totalling £4,034.88 on a £12,000 loan over 6 years. This loan was settled after 9 months and you then sold me another Payment Protection Policy on 29th December 2004 totalling £8,819.16 on a £25,000 loan over 7 years which was repaid 5 years early! In the short space of 9 months, you sold me the sum total of £12,854.04 in Payment Protection premiums.

 

I am truly bewildered and outraged by your conduct. I am giving you one final opportunity to refund the premiums totalling £15,514.64. If I am not in receipt of your refund by 4pm on Monday 11th June 2007, I shall be filing action against you in the county court for the full amount, together with costs and statutory interest. The full amount including statutory interest will be £19,178.86 plus £250.00 filing fee.

 

Should such action be necessary, I am confident that the courts will be outraged by your conduct and recognise that your greed and pursuit of profits is far greater than your duty of care to your customers. I intend to show copies of recent reports by OFT highlighting the results of their investigations into the mis selling of PPI. I am confident that documentation in my possession will show that all policies were mis sold to me, that they were extortionately expensive, and that you failed to meet my demands and needs in each and every single case. Further, I intend to show that you deliberately misled my trust and confidence in your integrity. I will ask the Judge to consider the costs of the policies, the very limited benefits (if any) and the fact that these were sold to me without my knowledge or understanding of the true cost. I shall also provide evidence showing the equivalent cover from just £7 per month.

Yours faithfully,

[hellhasnofury]

4th June 2007

 

Black Horse Ltd

116 Cockfosters Road

Holbrook House

Cockfosters

Hertfordshire

EN4 0DY

 

For the attn of S. Patel, Complaints Analyst

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Re: Agreement No’s: 351335136, 351380315, 351408665 and 35145338

Payment Protection Policies and Unlawful Penalty Charges

 

Further to your letter dated 29th May 2007. Firstly, I fail to agree with the comments of your second paragraph relating to the unexecuted agreement. I requested a copy of the original executed agreement relating to 35145338. This was sent to me on three separate occasions by yourselves showing no company signature. Some time into the handling of my complaint, I am then sent a copy which subsequently shows your company signature. However, there is no need for you to respond further on this subject as this is something on which the courts will have to decide.

Under separate cover, I have now received copies of all other agreements you hold on file for me. After much perusal, frankly I am outraged by their content. I am enclosing a Schedule of the Payment Protection Policies which you have mis sold to me which totals a staggering £15,514.64 (which includes £75 of unlawful penalty charges). I would like to outline each individual agreement:

 

1) On 8th January 2002 I took out a loan with yourselves for £2,000 over 3 years. You sold me a Payment Protection Policy which totalled £486.20. This was a single premium up front policy and included interest. This loan was repaid some 18 months early.

 

2) On 28th June 2003 I consolidated the above loan and took out a loan with yourselves for £7,000 over 5 years. You sold me a Payment Protection Policy which totalled £2,099.40. This was a single premium up front policy and included interest. This loan was repaid after 9 months - over 4 years early.

 

3) On 4th March 2004 I consolidated the above loan and took out a loan with yourselves for £12,000 over 6 years. You sold me a Payment Protection Policy which totalled £4,034.88. This was a single premium up front policy and included interest. This loan was repaid after 9 months - over 5 years early.

 

4) On 29th December 2004 I consolidated the above loan and took out a loan with yourselves for £25,000 over 7 years. You sold me a Payment Protection Policy which totalled £8,819.16. This was a single premium up front policy and included interest. This loan was repaid after 22 months - over 5 years early.

 

With regard to loan (1), I had been with my employer for some ten years. I enjoyed the benefit of full sick pay for 6 months, then half pay for a further 6 months. This policy not only should never have been sold to me, but was totally unsuitable for my needs. Further, I was not even aware of its existence.

 

With regard to 2,3 and 4. I was self employed when these loans were taken. Therefore any Payment Protection Policy would have covered critical illness only. These policies were extortionately expensive and I was totally unaware of their existence.

 

I would remind you that you have a duty of care to your customers. Payment Protection Policies should fit the needs and demands of each and every customer. Each policy and the cost of each policy should be properly explained to the customer. The terms, conditions and exclusions should also be properly explained. Also, a copy of the terms, conditions and exclusions should be sent to the customer. I have never at any time, received any such documentation.

 

Given my financial history with yourselves, and given that all loans were repaid exceptionally early, I believe a pattern of early settlement was evident. Yet, you continued to sell/recommend totally inappropriate insurance. Single premium policies are non refundable in the event of early settlement.

 

As an example, you sold me a Payment Protection Policy on 4th March 2004 totalling £4,034.88 on a £12,000 loan over 6 years. This loan was settled after 9 months and you then sold me another Payment Protection Policy on 29th December 2004 totalling £8,819.16 on a £25,000 loan over 7 years which was repaid 5 years early! In the short space of 9 months, you sold me the sum total of £12,854.04 in Payment Protection premiums.

 

I am truly bewildered and outraged by your conduct. I am giving you one final opportunity to refund the premiums totalling £15,514.64. If I am not in receipt of your refund by 4pm on Monday 11th June 2007, I shall be filing action against you in the county court for the full amount, together with costs and statutory interest. The full amount including statutory interest will be £19,178.86 plus £250.00 filing fee.

 

Should such action be necessary, I am confident that the courts will be outraged by your conduct and recognise that your greed and pursuit of profits is far greater than your duty of care to your customers. I intend to show copies of recent reports by OFT highlighting the results of their investigations into the mis selling of PPI. I am confident that documentation in my possession will show that all policies were mis sold to me, that they were extortionately expensive, and that you failed to meet my demands and needs in each and every single case. Further, I intend to show that you deliberately misled my trust and confidence in your integrity. I will ask the Judge to consider the costs of the policies, the very limited benefits (if any) and the fact that these were sold to me without my knowledge or understanding of the true cost. I shall also provide evidence showing the equivalent cover from just £7 per month.

Yours faithfully,

 

Another one of your fine letters stan. I may if permitted pinch a few sentences for my final demand with the natwesty. and then if now responce to court I think,

 

Have you had time re the poc yet?

[stan5131]

Hi Hell. Be my guest and pinch as much as your like. I am going to wait until Friday and if no response, will be completing the POC. I've made a start but needs to tweeking.

 

Stan

[stan5131]

After sending the last letter, I have had chance to study the Agreements sent to me. It transpires that they have sent three different copy agreements for the £25,000 loan.

 

One is unexecuted, the other two are signed by the company by two different people on the same date and one of these is not my signature!

[stan5131]

4th June 2007

Black Horse Ltd

116 Cockfosters Road

Holbrook House

Cockfosters

Hertfordshire

EN4 0DY

 

For the attn of S. Patel, Complaints Analyst

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Agreement No: 351453386

 

Further to my previous letter, also of 4th June 2007, I am writing to you under separate cover regarding the above Agreement.

 

As you are no doubt aware from our previous correspondence, I am challenging the authenticity of the execution of the above Agreement.

 

Following my Subject Access Request, you forwarded me a copy of the original above Agreement which showed no company signature. This was signed and dated 29/12/04 by myself but contained no company signature on your behalf! When I wrote to you pointing out that the Agreement was not properly executed, you sent a further ‘original’ copy of the Agreement which then contained your company signature dated 28/01/05.

 

As you had not fully complied with my Subject Access Request, I wrote to you asking for copies of all other Agreements held on your files. You complied with this request and sent copies of all other Agreements including another copy of the above Agreement. This copy of the Agreement bears a similar reproduction of my signature dated 25/01/05 and your company signature also dated 28/01/05 but now by a completely different person than sent previously. This is also not my signature.

 

I am enclosing copies of all three Agreements for your perusal. Perhaps you would care to entertain me with your comments.

 

Yours faithfully,

[TANZARELLI]

4th June 2007

Black Horse Ltd

116 Cockfosters Road

Holbrook House

Cockfosters

Hertfordshire

EN4 0DY

 

For the attn of S. Patel, Complaints Analyst

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Agreement No: 351453386

 

Further to my previous letter, also of 4th June 2007, I am writing to you under separate cover regarding the above Agreement.

 

As you are no doubt aware from our previous correspondence, I am challenging the authenticity of the execution of the above Agreement.

 

Following my Subject Access Request, you forwarded me a copy of the original above Agreement which showed no company signature. This was signed and dated 29/12/04 by myself but contained no company signature on your behalf! When I wrote to you pointing out that the Agreement was not properly executed, you sent a further ‘original’ copy of the Agreement which then contained your company signature dated 28/01/05.

 

As you had not fully complied with my Subject Access Request, I wrote to you asking for copies of all other Agreements held on your files. You complied with this request and sent copies of all other Agreements including another copy of the above Agreement. This copy of the Agreement bears a similar reproduction of my signature dated 25/01/05 and your company signature also dated 28/01/05 but now by a completely different person than sent previously. This is also not my signature.

 

I am enclosing copies of all three Agreements for your perusal. Perhaps you would care to entertain me with your comments.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

Looks like they have been naughty eh stan. Good work.

 

Tanz

[Todge]

stan

 

"Perhaps you would care to entertain me with your comments."

 

Blinding, truly blinding!

 

Love it.

 

T.