Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It's better to keep advice on the open forum for everyone's benefit. Maybe you could post up the correspondence in a single pdf document and cover up your personal details, reference numbers and so on? HB
    • Hi on the notice of disqualification it lists the 2 speed offences and marks offence withdrawn? This is for both offences and then the other 2 is the MS90s which I’m fined for and the additional costs. R
    • Hi,    It has taken a while, but I have received an email from Auxillis -  hello, we are not dealing with this claim all we do is log accident for you isnurance - the claim has been passed to your underwriter markerstudy 0344 873 8183 as they are deal with fault cliams ion behalf of adrian flux. thankyou auxillis   I have made repeated attempts to phone Markerstudy in between working from home, struggling for energy and trying to find a cheap car so that I can keep my job (community support worker). Thankfully I have a supportive team and I am being given phone calls to make but it cant last too long. I had a severe migraine over the weekend and also have quite bad whiplash in my neck and back.    I found this in my insurance policy booklet -    Protection and Recovery If the insured vehicle cannot be driven following an incident leading to a valid claim under this section, we will pay: • the cost of its protection and removal to the nearest approved repairer, competent repairer or nearest place of safety; and • the cost of re-delivery after repairs to your home address; and • the cost of storage of the insured vehicle incurred with our written consent. If the insured vehicle is damaged beyond economical repair we will arrange for it to be stored safely at premises of our choosing. You should remove your personal belongings from the insured vehicle before it is collected from you. In the event of a claim being made under the policy we have the right to remove the insured vehicle to an alternative repairer, place of safety or make our own arrangments for re-delivery at any time in order to keep the cost of the claim to a minimum     I do about 20-25000 miles a year with the work I do, I have been getting quotes and putting that I have now have one accident and no no claims bonus and the cheap quotes from similar companies to markerstudy are more than double what i paid last year at 8-900 and aviva is offering 2600 which is simply out of my price range and more than the car i am looking at.  I am starting to wonder if it is even worth going ahead with the claim as i have no one to claim from. I have had no information from any of the enquiries I have made.  I have a full tank of vpower diesel in the car in the impound, i can strip it for parts and probably make what I will be offered by the insurance payout and get the money quicker.  As I have made contact and started the process can I back out, still keep my NCB and a claim free history? Also what happens with my injuries? I don't think there is any permanent damage but my dr refused to see me and just gave me a boat load of naproxen and codeine. What happens in the future if things don't get better and I cancelled this claim? Can you claim injuries off your own insurance because the other guy ran and you cant find him? I have tried to ask these questions off markerstudy but they keep me waiting for nearly an hour then end the call.    Thank you for your time and help.  It is really appreciated.  I am quite honestly on the floor, I have been really ill, in hospital, had nearly 6 months off work and only been back full time a few weeks and now this.  The fact the company you pay large sums of money to look after you in a time of need is also behaving criminally just makes you want to give up.    
    • Thanks for the response. Am I able to send you the documents I’ve received or can you message via instant message and I’ll send these? Reece
    • Regretfully it does. Have you actually seen any papers which show what you were charged with (rather than what you were convicted of)? It is unusual not to be “dual charged” but if you were not charged with both, you are where you are. If you had been charged with both offences and providing you were the driver at the time, you could, after performing your SD, have asked the prosecutor to drop the “Fail to Provide” (FtP) charges in exchange for a guilty plea to the speeding charges (you cannot be convicted of speeding unless you plead guilty as they have no evidence you were driving). You will have difficulty defending the FtP charges. In fact, it’s worse than that – you have no chance of successfully defending them at all because the reason you did not respond to the requests is because you did not receive them and that’s entirely your fault. No it’s not correct. Six months from 18/11/23 was 18/5/24 so, unless they were originally charged, the speeding offences are now “timed out.” There is one avenue left open to you. If you perform your SD you must serve it on the court which convicted you. You will then receive a date for a hearing to have the matters heard again. Your only chance of having the matters revert to speeding (and this is only providing you were the driver at the time of those offences) is to plead Not Guilty, attend court. When you get there you can ask the prosecutor (very nicely, explaining what a pillock you know you were for failing to update your  V5C) if (s)he is prepared to raise “out of time” speeding charges, to which you will offer to plead guilty if the FtP charges are dropped.   This is strictly speaking not lawful. Charges have to be raised within six months. Some prosecutors are willing to do it, others are not. But frankly it’s the only avenue open to you. There is a risk with this. I imagine you have been fined £660 (plus surcharge and costs) for each offence. The offence attracts a fine of 1.5 week’s net income and where the court has no information about the defendant’s means a default figure of £440pw is used.  If the prosecutor is not prepared to play ball you can revise your pleas to guilty. A sympathetic court should give you the full discount (one third) for your guilty pleas in these circumstances but they may reduce the discount somewhat. The prosecution may also ask for increased costs (£90 or thereabouts is the figure for a guilty plea). So it may cost you more if you have a decent income (I’ll let you do the sums). But MS90 is an endorsement code which gives insurers a fit of the vapours. One such endorsement will see your premiums double. Two of them will see many insurers refuse to quote you at all meaning you will have to approach "specialist" (aka extortionate) brokers. So you really want to exhaust every possibility of avoiding MS90s if you can. One warning: do not pay solicitors silly money to defend you. Making an SD before a solicitor should attract just a nominal sum (perhaps a tenner). That’s all you should pay for. You have no viable defence against the FtP charges and any solicitor suggesting you have is telling you porkies. The offer to do the deal is easily done by yourself and you can save the solicitor’s fees to put towards a few taxis and increased insurance premiums if you are unsuccessful. In the happy event you find out you were "dual charged", let me know and I'll tell you how to proceed. (Seems a bit odd hoping you were charged with four driving offences rather than two, but it's a funny old world!).    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

walton v rbos


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4883 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Paul,

 

as usual i agree with Glenn, maybe as litigant in person you may not have had the legal knowledge or prowess of a chambers barrister, but surely a minor mistake or slight error or misinterpretation should not be dealt with in such a way !

Dont Rush - Take Your Time - Dont always take me seriously

:p

 

If you feel i have helped you then click

Here, if you feel i have not helped you then click Here, if you want to complain about this go Here, if you would like bank secrets then go Here.

 

MBNA - Case Charges+PPI+CI+LA+Damages+costs

RBS Credit Card - Case Charges+CI+LA+Costs

Barclays - Case Charges+CI+LA+Damages+costs

Halifax - Case Charges+CI+Damages+costs

Online Finance - Case Charge+CI+Damages+costs

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Paul,

 

as usual i agree with Glenn, maybe as litigant in person you may not have had the legal knowledge or prowess of a chambers barrister, but surely a minor mistake or slight error or misinterpretation should not be dealt with in such a way !

 

Even has a layperson we are all supposed to know the Law. However, a layperson would not have known that a default charge was unlawful if in an agreement it states: on default we can charge £25.00 to cover our costs.

 

This is the aproach i took for the set-aside. We all should know that a penalty in contract is unlawful we cannot plead we have just found this out, but we can plead we were misled into believing the charges were lawful as the contractual provision clearly states this.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul

 

I see what you mean now, it makes sense completely now.

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just read now the court order is set-aside the defendant can use the Limitation Act or Latches in their defence. Can anyone verify this.

 

Yes they can but Latches & the limitation act are meant to prevent claimants bringing stale claims where the defendants might no longer have access to witnesses or other evidence.

 

You must argue that the banks actions where not a one off act but as the banks continues to impose unlawful charges then the pre 6 years charges should be included as theirs is a continuing unlawful act. Therefore the 1st unlawful penalty charges is linked by their conduct past & present to the latest penalty charge.

 

It should also be brought to the attention of the court that if the bank are willing to prove their charges as being lawful now then the pre 6 year claim also fails Therefore it's in the banks interest to present their evidence by making standard disclosure

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya

 

Just read this thread and I must I am very sorry Paul, you have done spo much work on this....but, what doesn't kill us makes us stronger!

 

 

I am starting a similar claim and I wondered if we can work together andif I may be able to use some of your findings etc?:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=78767&goto=newpost

 

Paul, with regads to the comments u made to the judge re the defendant's costs from the small claims book u read, what were they?

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was taken from Patricia Pearls Practical guide to small claims book.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/announcement-center-book-br-dark.html

 

I think that is the answer un1boy.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Caro

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Defence suibmitted to Lloyds and the court last week just awaiting a hearing date.

I believe if a term in an agreement has been misrepresented, and i claim this, then the onus would be on Lloyds to prove the term stands up to the reasonable test as per UCTA 1977.

 

Time for another shot at RBS who haven't been playing ball they have failed in their obligation to provide data under a SAR issued 16/12/2006 they have not fully complied with 2 section 77 CCA requests, i think an incorrect statement of account to the tune of £8000 and failure to provide the original agreement will not impress a district judge.

 

My application to set-aside has been submitted to Manchester County Court hopefully it will be transfered to my local court.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting development. I wrote to RBS last week and explained by not complying with my section 77 request of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, that they remain in criminal default, and that i intend to make the Judge aware of this.

 

I have received correspondance this morning that they are in receipt of my request and that they intend to comply with it and in the meantime no further recovery action will be taken against me.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paul, I don't know possibly I am alone in thinking this, if so I will step back and shut up:) BUT I am having great difficulty in following your progress with this case. Would it be possible to do a summary post of the entire background to date, because I am entirely confused with all the different hearings, set asides, set-aside CCJ, non-compliance etc. etc. As I said maybe it is just me. Is anyone else confused?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paul, I don't know possibly I am alone in thinking this, if so I will step back and shut up:) BUT I am having great difficulty in following your progress with this case. Would it be possible to do a summary post of the entire background to date, because I am entirely confused with all the different hearings, set asides, set-aside CCJ, non-compliance etc. etc. As I said maybe it is just me. Is anyone else confused?

 

Hi bong, i can see why you're confused and maybe i should have started another thread to contest the court order but hopefuly i'll get a result in the very near future.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Interesting development. I wrote to RBS last week and explained by not complying with my section 77 request of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, that they remain in criminal default, and that i intend to make the Judge aware of this.

 

I have received correspondance this morning that they are in receipt of my request and that they intend to comply with it and in the meantime no further recovery action will be taken against me.

 

Paul

 

I have to be carefull what i say here but i beleive RBS may be edit they have sent agreements that wre never taken out just so the court order can be enforced.

 

This is the good bit. I have proof.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

ooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh !!!!!!!!

 

will be watching with baited breath !!

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Link to post
Share on other sites

ooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh !!!!!!!!

 

will be watching with baited breath !!

 

Can't say too much now Photoman but this as gone far beyond a bank charges claim.

No sleep at all last night, after scanning the agreements again i now know whats happend .

I will contact the relevant authorities today.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't say too much now Photoman but this as gone far beyond a bank charges claim.

No sleep at all last night, after scanning the agreements again i now know whats happend .

I will contact the relevant authorities today.

 

Paul

 

Good Luck Paul - Rootin for ya mate :)

links to my current claims ...

My claim - Yorkshire Bank Visa

chezt V RBS Mastercard

Chezt v RBS Joint Account

chezt v Abbey Credit Card

 

Settled ...

chezt V Duet Card/Creation Finance

chezt v's Studio Cards

chezt v's Littlewoods Catalogue

 

Next ...

Abbey Joint a/c & Single a/c

Barclaycard (Mine & Hubby's)

Anyone else I can think of ...! :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul,

Sorry for the hijack, but you might find this thread an interesting read also. It involves various questionable practices regards Data protection and access to information.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/royal-bank-scotland/56333-big-claim-aginst-rbos.html

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paul, I don't know possibly I am alone in thinking this, if so I will step back and shut up:) BUT I am having great difficulty in following your progress with this case. Would it be possible to do a summary post of the entire background to date, because I am entirely confused with all the different hearings, set asides, set-aside CCJ, non-compliance etc. etc. As I said maybe it is just me. Is anyone else confused?

 

Summary post.

 

1. In July 1998 a £9000 fixed rate personal loan and account overdraft balance of £300 was defaulted subsequently a CCJ was obtained by the bank with the court setting payments at £38.00 per month to clear the debt.

 

2. £1450 in charges were applied to the account between 1995 and account default.

 

3. In 2006 i challenged the charges by use of sec32 Limitation Act 1980 with the claim being struck out at the second hearing.

 

4. As the judgment amount in 1998 was incorect due to the level of charges on the account i beleive i should be given the opportunity to defend it.

 

5. I have just been succesful with a set-aside on the same basis against Lloyds.

 

6. I issued my set-aside application against RBS in April 2007 with a hearing on the 10th May.

 

6 At the end of April 2007 i made a CCA 77 request which requires the creditor to supply a statement of account and a true copy of the original loan agreement.

 

This is whare it gets interesting

 

7. The bank complied with my request and i received a letter on the 1st of May 2007. To my utter disbelief embodied in the the court order are 2 Consumer Credit Act Agreements dated 20th August 1998, the first is a variable rate loan of £8849 repayable over 12 months at £787.70 per month the second is also a variable rate loan of £369.00 repayable over 12 months at £32.76 with a statement of account showing £18000.

 

8. A clause in the agreement relates to breaches (if there is any breach of this agreement ) the charges on default. Interest is calculated at the rate of interest on the daily balance outstanding (both before and after any court decree or judgment) and applied in arrears quarterly.

 

9. These are fictitious agreements i have never seen these before i have never signed for a variable rate loan. Why is my name on these agreements? Why would the bank lend me nearly £9000 when they'de served a default notice on me the month before? Between 1998 and the present date how as an overdraft balance and a personal loan agreement changed into the above?.

 

10. Today i've made an application for a months stay on proceedings regarding the set-aside hearing-on advice, and i have an appointment with a solcitor next week. This is beyond my limited skills now.

 

11. It seems the fun is just about to begin because i have all documents from 1998( and i'm talking everything, sorry RBS) . The personal loan agreement and overdraft have been paid since judgment on the same account numbers these fictitious loans are asigned too now.

 

Comments welcome.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul,

Refer to my previous post.

I think a certain jounalist at the BBC may be interested in this story.

Not a good time to consider buying shares in RBOS !!

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Battleaxe

Paul,

 

Something is so far out, that it stinks. I think a forensic accountant is needed here to go over the RBS books. If you have all the documentation showing the monies have been paid and now RBS have come up with these agreements purporting that the loans aren't paid, begs the question, what has happened to the money you have paid.

 

I think you need an investigative journalist as well as an auditor versed in creative accounting.

 

This could blow RBS out of the water.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul,

 

lol, things do seem to be getting quite interesting dont they.

 

cant wait to find out whats behind it all, though at this point i think you may be better off playing your hand quite close to your chest, as the element of surprise is often the far better attack. A solicitor should serve you very well here and should guide you all the way to the bank so to speak. IMHO i would stay well away from (ahhh hmmm ****** journalists as is my experience they only ever want one thing and thats very usually not your best interests) maybe after the case has been heard perhaps a little exposure wouldnt go amiss :rolleyes:

 

Best of luck and keep us posted

 

Johnny

Dont Rush - Take Your Time - Dont always take me seriously

:p

 

If you feel i have helped you then click

Here, if you feel i have not helped you then click Here, if you want to complain about this go Here, if you would like bank secrets then go Here.

 

MBNA - Case Charges+PPI+CI+LA+Damages+costs

RBS Credit Card - Case Charges+CI+LA+Costs

Barclays - Case Charges+CI+LA+Damages+costs

Halifax - Case Charges+CI+Damages+costs

Online Finance - Case Charge+CI+Damages+costs

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul,

I have PM'd you, but for the benefit of others watching this thread, I wish to post what I have said. After further contemplation, I agree with progenic on this, and I also suggest you err on the side of caution for the time being regards the Press.

Seek some good sound legal advice. I suggest also that you perhaps PM some of the Moderators, and I even think Bankfodder himself would be interested, and able to provide suggestions for the best course of action.

After receiving advice, when you do come to discuss this with the Press, I would suggest you then restrict it to the more reputable Press assoc.

All opinions and advice I offer are purely my own, and are offered without any liability. If unsure seek the help of a licensed professional

...just because something's in print doesn't mean its true.... just look at you Banks T&C's for example !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest bong

Paul if these are binding agreements then presumably they would show that you had signed on the dotted line...? I am not following the CCA threads so I'm not up on these things but it seems to me they would need a signature of yours to prove that these are valid agreements?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul if these are binding agreements then presumably they would show that you had signed on the dotted line...? I am not following the CCA threads so I'm not up on these things but it seems to me they would need a signature of yours to prove that these are valid agreements?

 

Yes you're right bong they do need my signature,

I've studied the Consumer Credit Act and the SI 1983 regs and i have just had a cheque drop through the letter box today from a sec 85 claim, this will cover my lawyers fee next week.

 

I think i need to find out what address is on the original agreements, i phoned yesterday but they wouldn't tell me.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Received today from RBS.

 

 

Thank you for taking the time to contact the bank's Customer Relations Unit regarding the loan agreements that you believe are fraudulent, which has been referred to me from the Financial Ombudsman Service.

 

I know that you are unhappy with our service and i am sorry to learn of your disappointment.

 

To make sure that we fully address all your concerns i have requested background information from the areas involved. I will be in touch with you again, hopefully within the next two weeks, as soon as i have this information to hand.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...