Blair Oliver and Scott/Bank of Scotland ** Compensation awarded by FOS **

[citizenB]

Now that's one of the best complaint letters I have ever seen on here.

 

Brilliant letter.

[palomino]

rmw, here's one to remember for the future : at the top of your letter put the following -

 

"Served by First Class Post"

Served under section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

Dated : dd/mm/yyyy

 

 

Err, blush :o, I don't actually have the wording for that section myself though.

[citizenB]

rmw, here's one to remember for the future : at the top of your letter put the following -

 

"Served by First Class Post"

Served under section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

Dated : dd/mm/yyyy

 

 

Err, blush :o, I don't actually have the wording for that section myself though.

 

Section 87(1) of the 1974 Act allows the creditor to send you a default notice giving you fourteen days from the date you receive it to pay the arrears. The default notice must contain all of the necessary information under the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 ('the 1983 Regulations'), which includes.......

[citizenB]

One stray thought - do you think it might be possible to be banned from complaining to the FOS, like being banned from taking court action as a vexatious litigant?

 

I hope not, I have 8 complaints with them at the moment, 2 of them regarding Bank of Scotland:D

[reallymadwoman]

And I thought I was a serial complainer - this one will make 5, but one of the complaints was for 4 accounts, so it could have been 8.

 

And the results so far :- creditors 0 me 3 (and 2 pending)

[palomino]

Section 87(1) of the 1974 Act allows the creditor to send you a default notice giving you fourteen days from the date you receive it to pay the arrears. The default notice must contain all of the necessary information under the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 ('the 1983 Regulations'), which includes.......

 

In that case I've got the wrong Act:confused:. What's the one that says post is deemed to have been delivered 48 hours after the date shown?

 

Also, in the same vein, some companies don't use the Post Office anymore. Instead they use commercial delivery companies such as UKMail or TNT. These commercial companies don't have any of the delivery time obligations that the Post Office has, and routinely take much longer than 48 hours to deliver mail. UKMail for instance takes 5 working days.

Where do you stand in law in such cases?

[reallymadwoman]

So far as I am concerned, if a company chooses not to use guaranteed next day delivery from whichever provider they like, then they can't complain if they don't get a response within their given time limit. The number of times I've received demands for a response within 3, 5 or 7 days, only to check the date and find the time is already up.

 

Incidentally, in my last FOS case, the Ombudsman decided Blair Oliver and Scott were pre-dating letters then sending them 2nd class, giving you no chance to reply in time other than by phoning on the day it arrived. Not unsurprisingly, she thought that was a tiny bit unfair.

[fuzzybobble]

I've had this happen from Moorcroft and Capquest.

They always time it to arrive on the last day to contact them.

 

Not that I ever contact them. I always leave it a few days.

 

I've started writing the date received on each DCA letter now. Also keeping the envelope with it, if it has a readable postmark/date.

 

The more wrong doings I can have them slapped for, the better.

[citizenB]

So far as I am concerned, if a company chooses not to use guaranteed next day delivery from whichever provider they like, then they can't complain if they don't get a response within their given time limit. The number of times I've received demands for a response within 3, 5 or 7 days, only to check the date and find the time is already up.

 

Incidentally, in my last FOS case, the Ombudsman decided Blair Oliver and Scott were pre-dating letters then sending them 2nd class, giving you no chance to reply in time other than by phoning on the day it arrived. Not unsurprisingly, she thought that was a tiny bit unfair.

 

 

Banker Rhymes with is looking into whether there is some identifying mark on letters sent out by OCs and DCAs using UK Mail or TNT and is advising at every possible opportunity that people save the envelopes and date the received date on the letter. Quite a lot of the "in house solicitors" such as Blair Oliver & Scott and **** used by LTSB are notorious for sending letters that arrive after the date they expect you to call/respond.

[reallymadwoman]

I always immediately staple envelopes to letters and put the received date on them. Blair, Oliver and Scott taught me to do that!

[The GodMother]

Or if you dont have a decent staple gun that works when u want it to then use paperclips or hair slides.

 

One of my friends did not have a paperclip for her driving licences stuff and she used a hair slide does the same job.

[reallymadwoman]

I often use hair grips (I have lots as I have very long hair) instead of paper clips of which I never have any, especially for marking the relevant pages in the map book when planning a drive from the south coast to Loch Lomond!

[The GodMother]

well if they do the job then why no use them

[Having_A_Knightmare]

RMW this has got to be the best letter to date!!!!

 

Well done

[The GodMother]

i have borrowed the letter so i can read it properly later and edit it to suit my needs.

 

Should be fun editting and sending this off.

[reallymadwoman]

I know the more experienced members of this forum don't need telling this, but perhaps some newer members might. Whilst this complaint letter serves my purposes absolutely perfectly, it's not likely to get you a positive response from anyone. Unless you are as fed up as I am with the antics of your creditor, then I would suggest perhaps something a little more polite as your first missive.

[steven4064]

RMW, well said

[reallymadwoman]

Original post edited to draw attention to post 441, as the warning appears on a different page.

[reallymadwoman]

Many thanks to whoever tickled my scales.

 

I have to make it absolutely clear that I am no longer reduced to a quivering wreck every time yet another of their totally useless bits of paper lands on my door mat.

 

Thanks to CAG, I have gone from literally dreading the arrival of the post every day (after I changed my phone number and went ex-directory so they couldn't harrass me that way), to the point where even if nothing arrived I would immediately be worrying about what might come the next day. I now welcome anything and everything they might send, it's just more ammunition to use against them. I'm not even worried if they decide to take court action - I would welcome that too. The very worst that could happen is that I will lose and the court will order me to make payments that I can afford, which was what I was quite happy to do before they nearly killed me. And I mean that quite literally. The stress put me in hospital, and the doctors were concerned enough to get my parents back from Portugal.

Within a month of that episode, I found CAG whilst I was searching online for something, anything, that I could do about the harassment, and the rest as they say is history.

When I first started I had grave moral misgivings about not repaying money that I was told I owed. After all, if the bank said I owed it, they had to be right, didn't they? I now know better. Even if I did owe any of it, that does not give them the right to harass me, and if as a direct result of that harassment, I start to fight back, who's fault is it? If they'd left me alone I would have gone on paying my £1 a month for ever. As I think I've mentioned earlier in this thread, since I started fighting back I've paid them next to nothing, but I've cost them a small fortune. Justice.

 

Thank you CAG.

[steven4064]

I am no longer reduced to a quivering wreck every time yet another of their totally useless bits of paper lands on my door mat.

That is what CAG is all about - fantastic. Edited July 13, 2008 by steven4064
format

[The GodMother]

RMW.

I always send polite letters but find until i start to send the i am really annoyed letters i dont get any type of response as they sound to nice.

 

Yes i use the manners my mum made sure i had. As yes i do ask nicely for a prompty response. I think some company think they the nice letters are from ppl who will roll over and pay them if they snd enough demanding letters.

 

Good luck with your letter as i am sure you should gain a brill response from that. Just a question what are u sending cabot if that is going to BOS?

Edited July 14, 2008 by The GodMother
Asking the question

[steven4064]

I agree - you need to mind your manners for the first letter but quickly get more 'robust' thereafter.

 

Writing letters to finacial institutions is an art form, as RMW has shown. (I like to consider myself no slouch, either ) (or you GM)

[The GodMother]

oh trust me steven i am no slouch. One of my letters should not have got printed and been sent but it was printed by accident and got sent. I got a very nice reply saying were sorry to have cause you to complain were closing our file.

 

have not heard anything from them the OC or any other DCA since.

[reallymadwoman]

I'll post the Cabot letter on my cabot thread once it's all sorted - you can bet that, whilst it is rather more polite than the BOS letter, they should be in no doubt that I won't just roll over. It was sent by email last week, and I haven't had an acknowledgement yet. Automatic acknowledgements are so easy to set up that I can only assume Cabot don't want you to have proof that your email has been received.

[RFC1872]

I have also read elsewhere that Blair, Oliver and Scott are in fact Bank of Scotland - same registered office etc - so I find it particularly worrying that they should behave in this way. We've more or less come to expect it of the independent DCAs, but the big banks? Just think if one of them were to lose their credit licence!

 

Not having a pop at you Reallymadwoman, but who is going to revoke their licence - not this Government. From what I am reading Government bodies are not even hiding the fact that they are not going to make these people accountable.