walton v rbos

[Alphageek]

I know it's probably wrong, but I laughed when I read that!

[cashins]

Well, after producing documents out of thin air - I suppose it's in for a penny, in for a pound.

 

Trick is not to get found out:lol:

 

David

[creditman09]

I do wonder whether or not at some point a higher profile "deep throat" might

emerge from the depths of these banking organisations. Spilling the beans and pointing where to go for the evidence.

[Sparkie1723]

I do not think it is longer necessaryfor Paul to get any more evidence.....he has enough.

 

sparkie

[cashins]

I do not think it is longer necessaryfor Paul to get any more evidence.....he has enough.

 

Excellent.

 

Valid point though - if you systematically set out to defraud, sooner or later someone will blow the gaff.

david

[paulwlton]

I do not think it is longer necessaryfor Paul to get any more evidence.....he has enough.

 

sparkie

 

My solicitor is now privy to every one of my damning documents.

 

Paul

[paulwlton]

Excellent.

 

Valid point though - if you systematically set out to defraud, sooner or later someone will blow the gaff.

david

 

My solicitor has made the banks legal representatives aware that there will be "implications" for their client.

 

My part in this now is to sit back and enjoy.

 

Paul

[Sparkie1723]

My solicitor has made the banks legal representatives aware that there will be "implications" for their client.

 

My part in this now is to sit back and enjoy.

 

Paul

 

I hope everyone realises also the implications & effect it will have on all Nat West agreements .......as they are owned by RBS and also...... the fact that in CMS Telford Nat West and RBS employees work at desks next to each other,...... each knows what the other is working on and access each others customers credit files accounts etc at will .....and pass on information about them backwards andforwards without the customer knowing anything about it all.

 

sparkie

 

sparkie

[paulwlton]

The letter below has been recently sent to (amongst others) the FSA and the FSA consumer council panel.

 

Paul

 

 

Dated 8th Feb 2010

 

 

Dear Sirs

 

Further to the recent conversation with an FSA representative regarding my allegations of fraud and false accounting within the Royal Bank of Scotland’s Telford branch (Credit Management service (CMS)

 

I am now in the position to provide the FSA with documentary evidence from several sources (If need be) in order to confirm my allegations.

 

Briefly I have been in a rather distressing, for me long standing dispute with the RBS in regard to the manner in which they have handled my accounts, dispute and allegations, during which time has involved various Court proceedings at considerable financial cost as a Litigant in Person

 

As a direct result of my making a Data Subject Access Request I discovered that RBS Telford use a secret accounting system by which they had set up 2 new accounts to which contractual compound interest was and is being added the sum of which far exceeds the sum total of payments I was making to reduce my indebtedness. In other words unbeknown to me and without any agreement the bank was adding to my debt to such an extent it no longer bore any resemblance to my original debt

 

The only conclusion that can be reached by this behaviour is that if repeated throughout all the RBS debt recovery branches, which I suggest it is, is to ‘inflate’ the banks “book debt”. Furthermore I can prove beyond doubt that this practice by the bank is quite widespread and although they deny they use these inflated ‘internal’ accounts as part of their particulars of claim when issuing proceedings I can again prove beyond doubt that they do use these inflated accounts when seeking possession of a property. Sometimes these actions are not instituted until many years of being subjected to high rates of Interest when, I suggest, the increased debt justifies the bank to take such action.

 

 

The “Router Account”

 

According to RBS’s Chief Executive Mr Alan Dickinson, when defaulting customer accounts are transferred to CMS Telford they are assigned a “Router Account”. Apparently in one explanation given by the RBS the “Router Account” is a mechanism for aggregating the “Book Debt” or/and the customers total Indebtedness.

 

 

Another explanation given is that the newly created accounts are purely for Internal purposes and have no effect on a customer’s Indebtedness, and therefore need not know about them.

 

The “Router Account” is the customer’s personal account data although they are precluded from accessing it. The bank conceals its existence by withholding “Router Account” data from Subject Data Access Requests. Indeed, in my own case RBS confirmed that, “under no circumstances should I have been sent the “router account” including Integral statements” “they were sent in error” – this confirms RBS are concealing data.

 

I have been challenging RBS’s manipulative Internal Accounting practices since 2006 with the help of my right Honourable MP John Healey. My protracted dispute and allegations have featured several times in the media and this has led to other customers coming forward with the same or/and similar allegations.

 

 

The Commons Meeting

 

In July 2009 my MP John Healey arranged and then convened a meeting between senior RBS management and myself in the House of Commons. The RBS only consented to this meeting on the condition it was a “without prejudice” meeting

 

The meeting went extremely well (for me) as I proved all of my allegations but, more importantly the RBS were forced to admit that prior to the year 2000 defaulting customers accounts were set up to accrue interest without legal entitlement.

 

When questioned further by John Healey RBS stated that their “Recovery Accounting System” was defective prior to the year 2000. This defect in the system had serious consequences for the customer and their accounts

 

Having established as a matter of fact that a defective debt recovery accounting system existed prior to 2000, Mr Healey pressed the RBS further with his concerns, and put forward the fact that potentially there could be many more customers affected. This prompted RBS to admit that other customers would be affected.

 

The Effect of this Alleged False Accounting

 

It is inconceivable that customer’s accounts including overdrafts, fixed rate personal loans were required to be set up to accrue quarterly Compound Interest by the use of a “defective” recovery accounting system. Furthermore, if RBS senior Management were/are aware of this why as previously stated are RBS Issuing Court Claims and obtaining legal charges on their Customers property on “recovery” accounts set up prior to the year 2000?

 

 

 

I allege that by covertly using customers accounts to “create” phantom money RBS achieve three goals (possibly more) firstly, they substantially increase their asset value, which has a knock on effect in relation to shares however, the “assets” which they had created did not exist.

 

Secondly when a customer is taken to court and sued, I allege and understand that the phantom money is replaced by real money and Thirdly the phantom money subsumed in the banks “book debt” is possibly a nice little earner when it comes to paying rapacious bankers their perverse bonuses, as it “appears” that the bank is making high levels of profit when in truth the reverse is the fact.

 

Please note another of the RBS customers who I’m in regular contact with Mr Brian Grace is, amongst others, more than willing to provide you with evidence, which I think you will find confirms my allegations

 

Mr Graces MP Mr Andrew Miller also had the same concerns and who also met with the same officials of the Bank at another separate without prejudice meeting at his constituency office, as Mr Grace had the same allegations, his “ Router Account” had been presented in Court documents in his Court case against the RBS, Mr Grace had submitted a Subject Data Access Request in December 2005, from which the RBS concealed this accounting data, yet much to the surprise of Mr Grace presented it to the Court in March 2007 as a fait accompli

 

 

Links to media are attached.

 

Yours Faithfully

 

Paul Walton

 

Cc RH MP John Healey.

Cc John Fingleton.

[patrickq1]

The letter below has been recently sent to (amongst others) the FSA and the FSA consumer council panel.

 

Paul

 

 

Dated 8th Feb 2010

 

 

Dear Sirs

 

Further to the recent conversation with an FSA representative regarding my allegations of fraud and false accounting within the Royal Bank of Scotland’s Telford branch (Credit Management service (CMS)

 

I am now in the position to provide the FSA with documentary evidence from several sources (If need be) in order to confirm my allegations.

 

Briefly I have been in a rather distressing, for me long standing dispute with the RBS in regard to the manner in which they have handled my accounts, dispute and allegations, during which time has involved various Court proceedings at considerable financial cost as a Litigant in Person

 

As a direct result of my making a Data Subject Access Request I discovered that RBS Telford use a secret accounting system by which they had set up 2 new accounts to which contractual compound interest was and is being added the sum of which far exceeds the sum total of payments I was making to reduce my indebtedness. In other words unbeknown to me and without any agreement the bank was adding to my debt to such an extent it no longer bore any resemblance to my original debt

 

The only conclusion that can be reached by this behaviour is that if repeated throughout all the RBS debt recovery branches, which I suggest it is, is to ‘inflate’ the banks “book debt”. Furthermore I can prove beyond doubt that this practice by the bank is quite widespread and although they deny they use these inflated ‘internal’ accounts as part of their particulars of claim when issuing proceedings I can again prove beyond doubt that they do use these inflated accounts when seeking possession of a property. Sometimes these actions are not instituted until many years of being subjected to high rates of Interest when, I suggest, the increased debt justifies the bank to take such action.

 

 

The “Router Account”

 

According to RBS’s Chief Executive Mr Alan Dickinson, when defaulting customer accounts are transferred to CMS Telford they are assigned a “Router Account”. Apparently in one explanation given by the RBS the “Router Account” is a mechanism for aggregating the “Book Debt” or/and the customers total Indebtedness.

 

 

Another explanation given is that the newly created accounts are purely for Internal purposes and have no effect on a customer’s Indebtedness, and therefore need not know about them.

 

The “Router Account” is the customer’s personal account data although they are precluded from accessing it. The bank conceals its existence by withholding “Router Account” data from Subject Data Access Requests. Indeed, in my own case RBS confirmed that, “under no circumstances should I have been sent the “router account” including Integral statements” “they were sent in error” – this confirms RBS are concealing data.

 

I have been challenging RBS’s manipulative Internal Accounting practices since 2006 with the help of my right Honourable MP John Healey. My protracted dispute and allegations have featured several times in the media and this has led to other customers coming forward with the same or/and similar allegations.

 

 

The Commons Meeting

 

In July 2009 my MP John Healey arranged and then convened a meeting between senior RBS management and myself in the House of Commons. The RBS only consented to this meeting on the condition it was a “without prejudice” meeting

 

The meeting went extremely well (for me) as I proved all of my allegations but, more importantly the RBS were forced to admit that prior to the year 2000 defaulting customers accounts were set up to accrue interest without legal entitlement.

 

When questioned further by John Healey RBS stated that their “Recovery Accounting System” was defective prior to the year 2000. This defect in the system had serious consequences for the customer and their accounts

 

Having established as a matter of fact that a defective debt recovery accounting system existed prior to 2000, Mr Healey pressed the RBS further with his concerns, and put forward the fact that potentially there could be many more customers affected. This prompted RBS to admit that other customers would be affected.

 

The Effect of this Alleged False Accounting

 

It is inconceivable that customer’s accounts including overdrafts, fixed rate personal loans were required to be set up to accrue quarterly Compound Interest by the use of a “defective” recovery accounting system. Furthermore, if RBS senior Management were/are aware of this why as previously stated are RBS Issuing Court Claims and obtaining legal charges on their Customers property on “recovery” accounts set up prior to the year 2000?

 

 

 

I allege that by covertly using customers accounts to “create” phantom money RBS achieve three goals (possibly more) firstly, they substantially increase their asset value, which has a knock on effect in relation to shares however, the “assets” which they had created did not exist.

 

Secondly when a customer is taken to court and sued, I allege and understand that the phantom money is replaced by real money and Thirdly the phantom money subsumed in the banks “book debt” is possibly a nice little earner when it comes to paying rapacious bankers their perverse bonuses, as it “appears” that the bank is making high levels of profit when in truth the reverse is the fact.

 

Please note another of the RBS customers who I’m in regular contact with Mr Brian Grace is, amongst others, more than willing to provide you with evidence, which I think you will find confirms my allegations

 

Mr Graces MP Mr Andrew Miller also had the same concerns and who also met with the same officials of the Bank at another separate without prejudice meeting at his constituency office, as Mr Grace had the same allegations, his “ Router Account” had been presented in Court documents in his Court case against the RBS, Mr Grace had submitted a Subject Data Access Request in December 2005, from which the RBS concealed this accounting data, yet much to the surprise of Mr Grace presented it to the Court in March 2007 as a fait accompli

 

 

Links to media are attached.

 

Yours Faithfully

 

Paul Walton

 

Cc RH MP John Healey.

Cc John Fingleton.

now i need'nt explain a router account for a second time lol been added to facebook see what turns up jonhssory /

[lookinforinfo]

Do all banks use these Router accounts, and do they have different names for them. Even if they do have different names, if they were asked for details of their Router account, would they know what was being asked of them?

[lookinforinfo]

God, do you get to be a vexatious litigant with just two cases in 4 years with one in the offing? Seems a bit strong of the bank to include the 1998 case, since that would have been brought by the bank itself.

[paulwlton]

Section 17 seems to stand out.

 

 

http://www.lawteacher.net/PDF/TA%201968.pdf

[lookinforinfo]

I would think you would fail on

s.2 [1] A person’s appropriation of property belonging to another is not to be regarded as

dishonest-

(a) if he appropriates the property in the belief that he has in law the right to

deprive the other of it, on behalf of himself or of a third person;

Hasn't the Court already ruled that bank charges are part of their core business.

Edited February 14, 2010 by lookinforinfo

[paulwlton]

I would think you would fail on

s.2 [1] A person’s appropriation of property belonging to another is not to be regarded as

dishonest-

(a) if he appropriates the property in the belief that he has in law the right to

deprive the other of it, on behalf of himself or of a third person;

Hasn't the Court already ruled that bank charges are part of their core business.

 

Bank charges?

 

Section 17 Theft Act 1968 doesn't mention bank charges.

[JonCris]

These are NOT bank charges these are internal accounts where the banks has been unlawfully (as it's not in the T & C's) adding compound contractual interest thereby increasing the indebtedness many fold. When cornered the banks claim these accounts are for 'internal use only' A claim we now know to be rubbish as a number of persons have come forward stating that the bank has taken them to court on the basis of these greatly inflated accounts. Some have even lost their homes, or have had CO's imposed, for what was originally a debt of a couple thousands but which has mushroomed (entirely without their knowledge until they get the banks POC's) to many 10s of thousands of pounds

Edited February 14, 2010 by JonCris

[JonCris]

Also remember this is the same bank which appears to have introduced the idea of 'reconstructing' agreements

[JonCris]

In addition when confronted with this duplicity prior to any court hearing they drop their action. In the case of PW they added contractual compound interest AFTER Judgement So even though PW made ALL of the payments required by the court unknown to him the debt was increasing to the extent that his payments did nothing to reduce the debt in fact it actually grew

[paulwlton]

Also remember this is the same bank which appears to have introduced the idea of 'reconstructing' agreements

 

RBS claimed that the new accounts are "transitioning" accounts which were required to accrue "administrative" Interest. :confused::confused:

[paulwlton]

What RBS said at the Commons meeting.

 

 

 

Meeting on 13 July 2009, House of Commons

Paul Walton and Richard Helmsley (and others) of RBS

Convened by John Healey MP

 

This is a summary of contemporary notes that I took at the meeting.

 

PW set out his main concerns and criticisms. RH explained the process set up at the time in bank to deal with accounts requiring “recovery” action.

 

RBS response to two main PW challenges:

1 account numbers changed – this was part of arrangements for centralising the handling of such accounts in recovery, “transitioning” them from local branch to central bank management

2 interest was accrued and charged without legal authority – when liability was transferred to bank centre, terms and accounting treatment of interest changed in setting up “administrative” account; the administrative interest changed is a) not what the customer owes; b) not what RBS can charge to their corporate balance sheet.

 

RBS confirmed:

1 interest on PW account was frozen from the date of court judgement

2 errors had been made in PW case in: sending back office statements relating to administrative account; asking PW for administrative interest to be paid; identifying PW overdraft as a “loan” in back office administration.

 

RH apologised for series of errors.

 

RH agreed RBS would: check dates on original account (PW supplied copy); check terms of the loan and whether interest was chargeable when “customer relations had broken down”; check court record at way RBS case was argued and non-disclosures; look at effect on PW and his family.

 

PW wants: assurance that administrative account records been “destroyed”, as he doesn’t want it biting him again in a few years’ time; ill health and loss of earnings compensated; accusations of being “liar” and “fantasist” made in court accepted as wrong when he was making valid arguments.

 

RH undertook to write to JH and PW by the end of following week.

 

 

John Healey MP

17 January 2010

Edited February 14, 2010 by paulwlton

[paulwlton]

BBC radio are wanting to update my case.

 

There will be no holding back.... I am going to go for RBSs jugular.

 

I think it's about time I emailed MR Hemsley a link to this thread.

 

Paul

[lookinforinfo]

Have you heard from RH since the House of commons meetings and has he confirmed anything in writing that he apologised for then.

[lookinforinfo]

I'll try again. Part one is a joke

 

 

I would think you would fail on

s.2 [1] A person’s appropriation of property belonging to another is not to be regarded as

dishonest-

(a) if he appropriates the property in the belief that he has in law the right to

deprive the other of it, on behalf of himself or of a third person;

 

 

Part 2 is another joke based on a post by Bankfodder about the OFT bank charges decision-

"I have to say that although I followed the Court's reasoning very well and although I can see that their logic is faultless, it was surprising to me that they accepted that the charges formed the core business.

 

That was the issue on which we lost the battle: the banks make so much money out of charges that they now depend upon it.!!!!

 

It was a bit like saying "I am a thief, I have always been a thief, I depend upon thieving so you have to let me carry on doing it. "

 

Hence

Hasn't the Court already ruled that bank charges [ie robbery]are part of their core business.

[paulwlton]

Have you heard from RH since the House of commons meetings and has he confirmed anything in writing that he apologised for then.

 

Yes, but his offers were not acceptable. As a prerequisite to reaching any settlement RBS MUST destroy the falsely created accounts set up in my name and furthermore, they MUST show contrition by issuing a written apology.....otherwise the situation will further protract.

 

PW

Edited February 14, 2010 by paulwlton

[Sparkie1723]

In any event who would check with the RBS that they had destroyed your " Router Account" Paul.......The RBS ???....if they destroyed yours it would mean that they would have destroy all the others......I do not think they would do that.

 

sparkie