Jump to content


FSA To Review Waiver


crfx250
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5009 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

How about this, if we are having the stays put on us and they refuse to review our charges until after the hearing has settled everything. Why are THEYallowed to keep charging us ? it has to work both ways does it not ?

Surely, if the subject of fair charges is in doubt then how are they allowed to continue to apply them. They should have to freeze all future charges until this is settled.

 

What do you think ?

4th January 2008 - Prelim sent

16th January 2008 - Standard reply - NO!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 479
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what does surprise me Jenny. The amount of people on here complaining and doing nothing!

 

Write to your MP, the FSA, Gordon Brown, The Financial services Consumer Panel, add your name to the petition on the No 10 web site.

DO something, anything. If we all pull togehter we just may be able to do something. If we do nothing, then nothing will be done

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just sent this on to my MP, just hope many more of you do the same, errrrr well your own MPs of course lol:)

 

Chrissie x

 

 

If you go to the link below and just type in your postcode this gives you a process that automatically directs mail to your MP.

 

WriteToThem.com - Email or fax your Councillor, MP, MEP, MSP or Welsh, NI, London Assembly Member for free

 

Chrissie

 

PS Mind you I wouldn't hold up for a reply too soon they are all sunning themselves on holiday at the moment and I should think mail from irate constituants is very far from their minds. lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've sent a shortened version of DoS's letter to my MP today (yours was excellent DoS but I thought a little too long)

 

Mac

  • 04/04/07 - £104 exit fee refund - Portman BS
  • Halifax Current a/c 20yr (closed) - in progress - all 20 years statements recovered!
  • Halifax Platinum Card 15 yr - Court Action Commenced - all 15 years statements recovered!
  • A&L Current a/c - You're next..

Write to your MP and

COMPLAIN about the ANTI-CONSUMER way in which the OFT Test Case is being handled!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey all,

 

Was hoping i would find a thread like this to give me some light again been trying to reclaim since feb (woolwich/barclays), after the usual fuss I stuck to my times and got a court date of mid Oct due to volumes, now I find out its been stayed......Argghhhhhhhh!

 

Going to use this letter and send as many copies as I can :-)

 

If enough of us protest they have to do something.....Dont they......?

 

Kerryanna x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good on you Gazbuz,

Kerryanna, thats what we're hoping..we'vr got 2 moths to protest before the review, we've gotta give it a go.

 

Jenny x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what I sent - updated 09/12/07 to cover the two month waiver review by the FSA.

 

Read through and change for your circumstances as appropriate.

 

Rt. Hon Keith Hill, Member for Streatham

 

Date Here

 

Dear Mr Hill

 

I am one of your constituents in Streatham. I write to you to highlight

the recent (and in my view unjust) arrangement between the OFT, FSA and

UK retail banking industry to freeze out further overcharging

complaints whilst a test case is being brought; yet continue to allow

the banks to carry on levying their exorbitant penalty charges on

customers.

 

The FSA has also allowed the banks to apply for a stay in all court

proceedings of this nature until the case has finished. The Banks are

now to apply to the Master of Rolls to issue a blanket stay on all

court hearings.

 

This will mean that any active claims against banks will be put on hold

and will not be processed for what could take several years, if any

cases or appeals are indeed to be allowed.

 

This is an unjust situation for customers, including many of your

constituents, who are in the process of reclaiming charges.

 

Although I myself am happily in a position to be able to bear the cost

of making a claim, a number of people I have spoken making similar

claims to my own to were not able to afford the court fees required to

take their claims to the next step. They have had to save every spare

penny to raise the £120.00 needed so they could take the bank to court.

In some cases where the claim was over £5000.00 they have had to stump

up £250.00, something which was extremely difficult for some of them,

especially considering it was the high cost of these charges that have

put them in this position in the first place.

 

I am aware that some even have even taken out short term loans in order

to be in a position to take the bank to court to try and recoup some of

these charges. They are now left with no claim, no compensation and

hundreds of pounds out of pocket. Although there may be a slim chance

of them being able to recoup some of the court costs, they should be

allowed to continue with this claim and get their charges back, like

the thousands of others who have had their cases settled.

 

To allow the banks to still charge and not allow the consumer the right

to reclaim stands contrary to everything the FSA and the OFT and the

FOS were set up to do. Let's take a look at the mission statements of

our so-called Consumer Champions. The OFT web site states:

  • The OFT is responsible for making markets work well for consumers.
    We achieve this by promoting and protecting consumer interests
    throughout the UK, while ensuring that businesses are fair and
    competitive

 

The FSA website states:

  • We have a wide range of rule-making, investigatory and enforcement
    powers to enable us to meet four statutory objectives summarised as
    one overall aim: to promote efficient, orderly and fair markets and to help retail consumers achieve a fair dea

 

The FOS Website states:

  • So when we look at a complaint, we give both sides a fair hearing.

 

Protecting consumer interests? Help retail consumers achieve a fair deal Give BOTH sides a fair hearing? One word that appears in all of

their statements is fair. Yet their behaviour shows little fairness to the consumer.

 

I'm sure you will agree, sir, that these words begin to ring a little

hollow when we look at the deal that was reached behind closed doors

and without consultation with any of the organisations representing the

millions of consumers affected.

 

Furthermore, it is arguable that this action may also interfere with rights given under the ECHR directly, and as enacted in the Human Rights Act 1998.

 

Art.6 1. of the Convention states: “In the determination of his

civil rights … everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within

a reasonable time.”

In my view, It is unreasonable to allow an indeterminate stay, which

depends on litigation unconnected to the instant case; between other

parties who have no relation to the parties in the instant case.

 

I sincerely hope that you will do what you can help us in persuading

the FSA to amend this unfair and biased agreement and allow the

consumer to continue to fight for what is rightfully theirs.

 

The review two months into the waiver has now been completed and the FSA has unilaterally decided that the waiver continues to be fair - and by extension that nobody is being treated unjustly. But their main criteria for the success of this process (that those in experiencing hardship should not be adversely affected) is in my view far too narrow.

 

There are thousands like myself who at this point do not know when we will ever be allowed access to Justice. The test case and any subsequent appeals could take years and all the while the banks are still being allowed to levy excessive charges.

 

The FSA waiver review report can be read at the following web address:

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/other/two_month_review.pdf

 

Yours sincerely

MacBoy

 

Links to write to the politicians:

WriteToThem.com - Email or fax your Councillor, MP, MEP, MSP or Welsh, NI, London Assembly Member for free

  • 04/04/07 - £104 exit fee refund - Portman BS
  • Halifax Current a/c 20yr (closed) - in progress - all 20 years statements recovered!
  • Halifax Platinum Card 15 yr - Court Action Commenced - all 15 years statements recovered!
  • A&L Current a/c - You're next..

Write to your MP and

COMPLAIN about the ANTI-CONSUMER way in which the OFT Test Case is being handled!

Link to post
Share on other sites

We could still do with a letter for the FSA/OFT, DOS do you want to do one, the other letter is great for mp's could you reword it for the others?

 

Jenny x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t despair Kerryanna I am in exactly the same position as you with Nat West, I am going to apply to the court to have the stay lifted. There are links on this site which have the correct wording etc, I will look it out and send you the link

Don’t give up, keep going

Gaz

Link to post
Share on other sites

kerryanna , read from #61 on this thread , i dont know too much about it but im going to construct mine over the next few days against nat west , when ive done it i will let you have a copy so you can use it if you wish .

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/55856-son-steven4064-natwest-4.html?highlight=request+defence+struck+out

 

gaz x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone for sending this to your MP. Can I just say, that even if you're not claiming, please just send it anyway because it is your opinion and you will be helping others on this site.

 

Don't forget to tell your freinds & family to send one as well. Lets get them so fed up they will have to do something

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with DOS, come on everyone...we have the power now to make ourselves heard, this is a biggie and affects all of us, we cant sit back and take this.

 

Kerryanna, this is the link hunny HTH...

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/17065-application-removal-stay-updated.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just sent DoS's letter to all my MSPs in West Lothian.

Keep on going!

27th April - Requested Statements

13th May - Received Statements:D

15th May - Preliminary request for £4780 sent.:D

16th May - Royal Mail confirm Letter received.:D

23rd May - Received Letter considering claim. :grin:

30th May - Letter Before Action sent. :D

10th July - Times Up!! FOS claim going in.

16th July - Measly 30% of claim offered as goodwill

17th July - Rejected offer letter sent

25th July - Acknowledgement of Reject Letter received

26th July - Screwed over by the OFT,Banks, FSA & FOS all in one go.:evil:

Never even felt it happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How about this, if we are having the stays put on us and they refuse to review our charges until after the hearing has settled everything. Why are THEYallowed to keep charging us ? it has to work both ways does it not ?

Surely, if the subject of fair charges is in doubt then how are they allowed to continue to apply them. They should have to freeze all future charges until this is settled.

 

What do you think ?

I suppose the principle innocent until proven guilty applies ? The banks allege their charges are fair , transparent and part of the T&C when opening the account and that's why they continue to charge them. They will do so until told to stop by a court of law which is the process initiated by the OFT.

Now consider this: If during the duration of the test case they would agree to suspend their charges awaiting the outcome and then end up winning the court case against all odds, would we not all get a big backdated bill, just as the banks could face a big backdated pay-out if they loose ?

Maybe it is better this way, I'd rather have a backdated refund than a backdated bill ?

On the other hand I could see them loosing the case and get some sort of a clause to say they do not have to refund retrospectively but must stop from the day of judgement. Then we would be snookered I suppose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DOS hunny, i've amended your letter abit to send to the FSA & OFT, does it look okay?

To Whom It May Concern,

 

I write to you in the hope you can help me in my plight with the bank and in particular the waiver given to banks by the FSA.

 

As you are aware that on 27 July 2007, the OFT commenced litigation proceedings against the big seven banks to try and establish once and for all as to whether these overdraft fees are actually unlawful.

 

Whilst we agree with this course of action, the FSA has waived the regulation that enforces the banks to process claims of this nature until the outcome of this hearing.

This means that any claims going through the banks now for reclaiming charges (sometimes in their thousands) are put on hold and will not be processed for what could take up to two years if any appeals are allowed.

 

The FSA has also allowed the banks to apply for a stay in all court proceedings of this nature until the case has finished. The Banks are now to apply to the Master of Rolls to issue a blanket stay on all court hearings.

 

This is a ridiculous situation for all local people who are in the process of reclaiming charges. And, just to rub salt in the wounds, they have allowed the banks to keep on charging!!!

 

The majority of the people I have spoken to ( including myself) were not able to afford the court fees to take the claim to the next step. They have had to save every spare penny to raise the £120.00 needed so they could take the bank to court. In some cases where the claim was over £5000.00 they have had to stump up £250.00, something which was very, very hard for these people to find, considering it was the high cost of these charges that have put them in this position. Some even took out short term loans so they could take the bank to court to try and recoup some of these charges. They are now left with no claim, no compensation and hundreds of pounds out of pocket.

Although there may be a slim chance of them being able to recoup some of the court costs, the issue is that they should be allowed to continue with this claim and get their charges back, as have thousands of consumers all over the country.

 

To allow the banks to still charge and not allow the consumer the right to reclaim is against everything the FSA and the OFT and the FOS are supposed to stand for.

 

The OFT web site states :

 

The OFT is responsible for making markets work well for consumers. We achieve this by promoting and protecting consumer interests throughout the UK, while ensuring that businesses are fair and competitive

 

The FSA website states :

 

We have a wide range of rule-making, investigatory and enforcement powers to enable us to meet four statutory objectives summarised as one overall aim: to promote efficient, orderly and fair markets and to help retail consumers achieve a fair deal

 

The FOS Website states;

 

So when we look at a complaint, we give both sides a fair hearing.

 

Protecting consumer interests? - help retail consumers achieve a fair deal? Give BOTH sides a fair hearing? One word that appears in all of their statements is FAIR. How is this fair?

 

How can they be protecting the consumer interest by stopping them reclaiming what is rightfully theirs and still allowing the banks to charge these ridiculously high penalty charges.?

 

I understand that the banks disagree they are unlawful, so why have they kept paying out to consumers at the rate of around £500 million in the last 12 months? This alone should tell the FSA that the consumer has to keep claiming against the banks.

 

This situation alone will save the banks hundreds of millions of pounds, firstly through not paying out claims, not having to pay legal fees and more importantly, due to the Limitation Act 1980, the longer this case goes on the more they will save under the 6 yr rule of the above Act.

 

So, whilst this will save the banks money, Barclays in particular has announced today their profits are 4 billion ponds this year alone, the consumer goes further and further into debt by having charges still applied.

 

This is just the tip of the iceberg, I am sure there are many more people out there that will be destined for financial hardship as a result of this legislation. Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of consumers all over the country who have started their claims and some may also be made bankrupt by allowing the banks to still charge. All this caused by a regulator who is supposed to have the consumer in their best interest.

 

I would like to see how they explain that this benefits them. The problem with all this is, it was all done behind closed doors for months without anyone knowing except the banks, the FSA , the OFT and the FOS, and then, without a care in the world for consumers or anyone else, put into practice. The nice little arrangement that the banks had already sorted with the FSA, the OFT and the FOS, the three regulators set up to protect the public.

 

I also understand that It could also interfere with our rights under the European Convention on Human Rights directly and as enacted in the Human Rights Act 1998.

 

Art.6 1. of the Convention provides that “ In the determination of his civil rights … everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time.”

 

It is unreasonable to allow an indeterminate stay which depends on some litigation unconnected to the instant case, between other parties who have no relation to the parties in the instant case.

It is not clear that the matter will be heard as predicted and in the event that it does go to trial, there could then be appeals and subsequent appeals so that the matter might become protracted and even last as long as 3 years or more – from the date of the commencement of trial.

 

I sincerely hope that you can help us in getting the FSA to revoke this unfair and biased legislation and allow the consumer to continue to fight for what is rightfully theirs.

 

I thank you for you time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...