walton v rbos

[pebsham]

Are any caggers aware of customers that have been taken to court and the "router" account used as proof of debt. If so could a "class action" not be started for some kind of fraud or dirct theft. The only way for real change is at government level and the only way to get them off their expenses-stuffed backsides is negative publicity.

 

It's been mentioned several times anecdotally but I've not noticed anybody actually stating it's been used against them?

[gh2008]

RBSs latest offers to settle are not headed without prejudice so I guess these may be shown to the Judge.

 

If those letters are part of a genuine offer to settle and the chain was started with a 'Without Prejudice' letter then the whole chain is considered privileged.

 

Of course you may disclose your own privileged letters, however if they reveal the contents of the other side's letter then you can't.

 

A letter, even headed 'Without Prejudice', that is not part of a genuine offer to settle is not privileged and can be disclosed by either party.

[PriorityOne]

If those letters are part of a genuine offer to settle and the chain was started with a 'Without Prejudice' letter then the whole chain is considered privileged.

 

Of course you may disclose your own privileged letters, however if they reveal the contents of the other side's letter then you can't.

 

A letter, even headed 'Without Prejudice', that is not part of a genuine offer to settle is not privileged and can be disclosed by either party.

 

 

That's very interesting....

 

There are situations where "without prejudice" correspondence can be shown during proceedings, but I can't remember the precise reasons for this right now. Maybe JC can clarify the circumstances for us?

[paulwlton]

Are any caggers aware of customers that have been taken to court and the "router" account used as proof of debt. If so could a "class action" not be started for some kind of fraud or dirct theft. The only way for real change is at government level and the only way to get them off their expenses-stuffed backsides is negative publicity.

 

It's been mentioned several times anecdotally but I've not noticed anybody actually stating it's been used against them?

 

The transitional account (aka as a tracker loan...pre 2000) is what they would sue on, the "router" account is presented to auditors. And, yes there is evidence.

 

PW

[paulwlton]

Another customer's "transitional" account.

 

Naughty, naughty.......makes ya sick dunit!

 

 

Edited February 15, 2010 by paulwlton

[lookinforinfo]

Paul, I am sorry mate, but I am having trouble getting my head around how it works.

I understand that an account is transferred from the local branch to Telford-after a CCJ has been lodged, or when there is little hope of the debt being recovered in the short term.

 

Once in Telford, I assume that this becomes Transitional account -or Tracker account, where they add whatever charges are incurred by being handled by Telford on to the existing defaulted account, which would already contain a fair amount of charges for missed payments, returned d/debits and legal fees etc.etc. while it had been running in the local branch.

This tracking account is presumably what the customer gets when they send

the bank and SAR.

 

But in addition to that account, Telford also set up a Router account which charges compound interest on the debt even when the account is subject to a Court Order. Is there anything else that is different between the tracker account and the Router account?

 

You said that it is the Router account that is shown to the auditors. Should they not pick up on interest being charged when it shouldn't?

 

You also said that there have been situations where the Router account has been used in Court cases rather than the Transitional one. So not a well kept secret the Router account. I assume that would have been an error on the banks part -putting forward the wrong account? Or would both accounts be the same in this case, since the bank could charge interest on that account as it was not subject to a Court order?

 

I note that you have now shown a number of Router accounts, but they aren't much of a help [to me at least-I am a bit thick] since there is no copy posted of the original account or transitional account even, to show how the accounts actually differ.

[paulwlton]

Paul, I am sorry mate, but I am having trouble getting my head around how it works.

I understand that an account is transferred from the local branch to Telford-after a CCJ has been lodged, or when there is little hope of the debt being recovered in the short term.

 

Once in Telford, I assume that this becomes Transitional account -or Tracker account, where they add whatever charges are incurred by being handled by Telford on to the existing defaulted account, which would already contain a fair amount of charges for missed payments, returned d/debits and legal fees etc.etc. while it had been running in the local branch.

This tracking account is presumably what the customer gets when they send

the bank and SAR.

 

But in addition to that account, Telford also set up a Router account which charges compound interest on the debt even when the account is subject to a Court Order. Is there anything else that is different between the tracker account and the Router account?

 

You said that it is the Router account that is shown to the auditors. Should they not pick up on interest being charged when it shouldn't?

 

You also said that there have been situations where the Router account has been used in Court cases rather than the Transitional one. So not a well kept secret the Router account. I assume that would have been an error on the banks part -putting forward the wrong account? Or would both accounts be the same in this case, since the bank could charge interest on that account as it was not subject to a Court order?

 

I note that you have now shown a number of Router accounts, but they aren't much of a help [to me at least-I am a bit thick] since there is no copy posted of the original account or transitional account even, to show how the accounts actually differ.

 

Local branch send customers accounts to CMS Telford.

 

CMS change account numbers and alter nature of accounts - the accounts are now known as "recovery" accounts and start to accrue administrative Interest.

 

The customer's accounts are assigned to a "router" account - the "router" is a mechanism for aggregating the customer's Indebtedness under several accounts.

 

Auditors don't see Interest accruing in the "router" account as the Interest accrues in the customers "recovery" accounts.

 

CMS used this practice throughout the nineties.... excuse being their system was defective up until 2000.

 

I am privy to pre and post transitioning statements.

 

Paul

[patrickq1]

cms also do the accounting from telford of nat west or they were doing ?

[debbbbsy]

Hi Paul, good to have you back.

 

Part of a Statement from Mark Johnson,Group Legal,RBS. 14 August 2009.

 

 

"To begin with I should clarify that the procedure in the 1990's when a customer's branch based account went into default was for the account to be closed to prevent further usage. The outstanding debt was then transferred to our Credit Management Services Department("CMS")to recover the debt, and in doing this the account would be given a new account reference number to allow us to track the debt, any interest thereon and enable us to track any payments made and properly apply them to the account. This is the "transitioning" process which I understand has been referred to in previous correspondence."

 

Firstly, until this letter we had never ever heard the word "transitioning".

He is basically saying, that these are our origonal accounts but with new numbers. So you would assume then, that the "Transitioning" process would be seamless, an instant click on the computer. So explain this.One of my "New Transitioned" accounts is opened on the 18 March 1997. But my current account, which I hadn't used for over 3 years, had no valid debit/cheque quarantee card for, was still accruing interest on the 27 March 97, and wasn't closed until 4 April 97. :-?

Is it possible that the RBS statement is a load of utter rubbish.

 

Debs

[paulwlton]

Hi Paul, good to have you back.

 

Part of a Statement from Mark Johnson,Group Legal,RBS. 14 August 2009.

 

 

"To begin with I should clarify that the procedure in the 1990's when a customer's branch based account went into default was for the account to be closed to prevent further usage. The outstanding debt was then transferred to our Credit Management Services Department("CMS")to recover the debt, and in doing this the account would be given a new account reference number to allow us to track the debt, any interest thereon and enable us to track any payments made and properly apply them to the account. This is the "transitioning" process which I understand has been referred to in previous correspondence."

 

Firstly, until this letter we had never ever heard the word "transitioning".

He is basically saying, that these are our origonal accounts but with new numbers. So you would assume then, that the "Transitioning" process would be seamless, an instant click on the computer. So explain this.One of my "New Transitioned" accounts is opened on the 18 March 1997. But my current account, which I hadn't used for over 3 years, had no valid debit/cheque quarantee card for, was still accruing interest on the 27 March 97, and wasn't closed until 4 April 97. :-?

Is it possible that the RBS statement is a load of utter rubbish.

 

Debs

 

Debs

 

The word "transitioning" is short for - let's screw the customer and cook the books at the same time.

 

Paul

Edited February 16, 2010 by paulwlton
Defamatory comment....I should know better!

[lookinforinfo]

Are their procedures for local branch defaulted accounts still the same in 2010?

[DandD]

Paul

 

You know about this, but for everyone else here's a bit of info.

 

The RBS obtianed a ccj against me and Mrs D in 1999, included within their POC were 3 accounts, our business CURRENT account, Mrs D's personal CURRENT account and my personal CURRENT account.

 

They got Judgment! Only because we didn't defend it. (No CAG at the time). We NEVER admitted the debt on the Courts Admission Form, but we didn't attend court.

 

At the time my current account was overdrawn by around £2000 and the bank got judgment on this amount.

 

We paid £300 per month for 7 Years to try to clear our accounts. We stopped paying. So they now have a Charging Order on our home.

 

The bank tells Paul that they don't apply post judgment interest!! Well, this same account has now risen to £15,000 after judjment, even though we have been paying £300 per month. These payment have been applied to different accounts no doubt.

 

I am now being pusued by Capquest for full payment of £15,000 on my personal account that was £2000 on the original POC's or they will take me to court and apply for a CO on my home!!!

 

Don't they realise they already have one!!!!!!!!

 

Now, I know if they do take me to Court for an alleged debt that they already have judgment on then I will have a Field Day.

 

Here's the last statement that I have (obtained under DSAR)

 

[pebsham]

Paul

 

 

We paid £300 per month for 7 Years to try to clear our accounts. We stopped paying. So they now have a Charging Order on our home.

 

 

 

How much was your total debt because you paid them back over £25,000 over the 7 years?

 

Odious little blood-suckers

[humbleman]

At the time my current account was overdrawn by around £2000 and the bank got judgment on this amount.

 

We paid £300 per month for 7 Years to try to clear our accounts. We stopped paying. So they now have a Charging Order on our home.

 

 

are you taking steps to recover monies they have ro**** from you.

[PriorityOne]

At the time my current account was overdrawn by around £2000 and the bank got judgment on this amount.

 

We paid £300 per month for 7 Years to try to clear our accounts. We stopped paying. So they now have a Charging Order on our home.

 

The bank tells Paul that they don't apply post judgment interest!! Well, this same account has now risen to £15,000 after judjment, even though we have been paying £300 per month. These payment have been applied to different accounts no doubt.

 

 

Words fail me!!!! :mad:

[patrickq1]

nothin short of daylight robbery

[patrickq1]

need to prepare your case and now turn the tables put yourself in charge they took advantage of you they have also hoodwinked the judge by the sounds of things

[banker_rhymes_with]

How many other banks are doing this, I wonder.

 

RBS won't be the only one I am sure.

 

I don't think we have even begun to get to the bottom of the so-called banking crisis. The RBS issues alone are still unfolding.

 

Cheers,

BRW

[itsamomentintime]

Paul

I didnt think i could be more disgusted at RBS's tactics, but as more and more router accounts are posted on here, i am starting to think that this is bigger than i could have imagined

 

exposure - lots of it - is needed

 

whats the next step?

[debbbbsy]

How much was your total debt because you paid them back over £25,000 over the 7 years?

 

It was origonally £25k, a business debt,& 2 personal accounts.

We paid £6000 into an IVA, but that failed after 3 years. Paid £25k towards CCJ. According to last set of statements(2009) total debt, stands at £110+k.

 

According to the bank we only owe £39k:( but for accounting purposes they claim we owe £110K & rising daily,.As Paul says, they are using debt ledger accounts to artificially inflate there balance sheet, & have since the 1990's been using these accounts to make themselves appear more profitable then they actually were. Executives have recieved bonuses based on these accounts (The interest accruing is 100% profit), they can borrow & offset there own debts against these "Internal" accounts.

Debs

[paulwlton]

It was origonally £25k, a business debt,& 2 personal accounts.

We paid £6000 into an IVA, but that failed after 3 years. Paid £25k towards CCJ. According to last set of statements(2009) total debt, stands at £110+k.

 

According to the bank we only owe £39k:( but for accounting purposes they claim we owe £110K & rising daily,.As Paul says, they are using debt ledger accounts to artificially inflate there balance sheet, & have since the 1990's been using these accounts to make themselves appear more profitable then they actually were. Executives have recieved bonuses based on these accounts (The interest accruing is 100% profit), they can borrow & offset there own debts against these "Internal" accounts.

Debs

 

Debs

 

The OFT want your evidence....I'll pm you the email.

 

Paul

[caro]

And the Government saw fit to bail RBS out.

[dad]

Paul, Sparkie, Debbbsy,

 

The implication of your accusations is that there is a substantial amount of public money invested in RBS at risk. In which case it would be appropriate to draw this to the attention of the National Audit Office.

 

Members of the public with concerns about the misuse of public money

 

Central government spending

 

 

Concerns regarding central government spending may come under our remit.

 

Concerns should be addressed in writing to the Comptroller and Auditor General who will deal with the matter as appropriate:

 

Amyas Morse

Comptroller and Auditor General

Private Office

National Audit Office

157-197 Buckingham Palace Road

London

SW1W 9SP

I would also copy any letter to the chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, which supervises the work of the NAO:

 

Mr Edward Leigh MP

Chairman

Public Accounts Committee

Committee Office

House of Commons

7 Millbank

London

SW1P 3JA

[pebsham]

Why the hell have the MP's involved in this not tabled questions in the house?

 

We know through you guys of at least 2 that have intimate knowledge of the situation in the house of Denmark.

[johnerog]

Why the hell have the MP's involved in this not tabled questions in the house?

 

We know through you guys of at least 2 that have intimate knowledge of the situation in the house of Denmark.

 

Make that house of Frazier (or John Lewis)