Hello all, Just wondered what people feel about more ways of charging customers money? Earlier in the year we had a update to the conditions on a Sandander storecard. "Condition 9.10 - this new Condition explains that you may not have a credit balance on your Account, but if there is a credit balance for three consecutive months, we will charge you a fee of up to £10 (the fee will not exceed the amount of you credit balance)." So we wrote back and asked (gist) how they could justify charging people being in credit with them? We did have a waffle of an answer back that basically said they could do what they like, it is in the terms and conditions - but they didn't answer my question. So we wrote again asking again. This time no reply for month. However today a letter comes from Santander saying ".... your card is due to expire in the coming month.... ....following a review of your account we will not be reissuing a new card and therefore after the defined expiry date on your card the account will only be open for payments....." We have not missed any payments, some month the balance is paid off and sometimes there is a declining balance with at least 15% paid off. Does this sound like petty retaliation? We are not bothered is they do close the account, the store has just lost a customer and the store is going to be told why, (not that it will make any difference ;-) ). Cheers

Hello, Jamesbond and suziedarkness. Sorry I missed you. I don't check this as this case is so moving so sloooooowly. Usually though get email from the system when replied to - will check the IT here GE Money are a bunch of CENSORED CENSORED CENSORED CENSORED that CENSORED CENSORED CENSORED to good for them CENSORED CENSORED CENSORED James has answered why the route was the Finance and Leasing Association. Our loan was 2000. I did ring the Financial Ombudsman Service on the off chance but told me they could not help. We hassled the FLA and finally they said the matter would be passed up to a 'senior manager'. Eight weeks later - nothing. So the Director General of FLA is Mr Stephen Sklaroff had a letter asking what is going on, (a former diplomat no less - apt really as GE Money think they have immunity to common sense and the law). A complainhas been loged with the Infomation Comissioners office about that fact GE Money still are passing incorrect info through to the Credit Reference Agencies. Moving house is off at the moment as our credit file has GE Money's mess all over it. As soon as something happens, I'll put it up.

Hello.... ............... hello ...... .................................... hello..... ............................................................ hello..... If your are wondering, that's supposed to be an echo ;-) Smile (The Cooperative) are sooooo quiet. No real change. 25th March the Financial Ombudsman Service ruled against us (shock ). Part of their reasoning was we could afford to pay the charges - now. Plus the Supreme Court had found in favour of the Banks and therefore the Co-operative trading as smile. As you can probably guess. A rebuttal went straight back. In 2007 we most definitely could not afford it. And even by a long stretch of the imagination we could hardly afford it now. How many families of four do you know that live in a 1-bedroomed house? Plus the Supreme Court ruling is hardly the emphatic victory the Bank would like us to think. We had a response from the FOS about a month latter to say the case would be reviewed. We thought it would be an idea to get a credit file to see how bad the file looked thanks to the smile. And as expected they are not passing to the Credit Reference Agencies the fact the account is "in dispute" or "under query" or similar. Oh to be a delinquent! This does sink any chance of get out of the 1-bedroomed house for the moment but we have started the route of complaint to the Bank, The Information Commissioner's Office. And when the dust settles, our re-elected Member of Parliament. Ttfn

Time for an update: From an money point of view it is resolved. From getting the Bank sorted and them admitting their irresponsible behaviour, it isn't resolved. The account was eventually closed and it even appears that the Credit Reference Agencies were told. A few weeks back the Financial Ombudsman Office wrote to say there was no complaint to answer as the account was closed. Do we want the matter investigated further? We replied that the FOS initial intervention may have speeded up the response from the Bank to resolving the closure of the account. As up to that point nearly three weeks had passed with no action by the Bank even though they had been paid the requested amount and as usual they were not answering letters, faxes or secure messages. BUT as for the initial point of the complaint was not answered by the Bank, we DO want it investigating further. Mind you, wind, peeing and into spring to mind ! If anything actually happens we'll post it up. Cheers,

Hi, Hope you have some joy with the Co-op soon. I have used these fax numbers in the past, you might already have these. 0161 903 4739 - Customer Feedback 0161 903 5946 - Executive Feedback But as I have found with the Co-op it tends to be "Non-Feedback". Good luck.

Hi, Sorry to here the Co-op are up to their usual tricks with their not very modern systems. I can't say for certain as I bank with smile but for I would imagine the terms and conditions are very similar. "8. Our Right to refuse to make a payment... ... you do not have available money (by way of cleared funds or formal overdraft) in your account at 9pm the business day before to cover payments. We may consider any due payments made, agreed or authorised from your account regardless of whether or not they have yet been deducted" "3. Cash 3.1 When you pay cash into your account at any of our branch counters or with your card at a Post Offce® the money will be available immediately after we receive it provided the payment in is made before 4.30pm. Cash paid in after 4.30pm will be credited to your account the next business day." To me they are almost contradictory. Hey we can process you deposits straight away BUT can't cope with making payments unless the funds are there the day before ???? Depending on your track record with the Bank, you may be able to call customer services and ask for a refund. So for example if this is the first time something like this has happened there is a good chance they will reverse the charge. Especially as you can show you made attempts to rectify the situation. If I asked I would get refused, being at loggerheads with them for three years, with Financial Ombudsman case in the mill and court pending , (me taking them re charges). one thing I will say though is the customer service has declined in the 10 years I have banked with them. It was at one time excellent, it is now below average and it does seem to depend who you get on the phone, (only my opinion). They changed the rules a year or two back (could be more) so the funds had to be in the account the day before. It is a mockery of 21st banking that they can show the money there and the cheque not gone out but still refuse to pay it !!! One reason of course is this earns them extra money - cynic aren't I Hope this helps.

Today FLA have maintained that GE Money have not breached the their code, and it has gone as far as it can - deadlock. FLA has still not answered how as a trade association member, GE Money are still adding interest, and sending duff ino to CRAs - and this is okay? My guess is they wont as FLA seem to be in the pockets of the 'members'. ;-)

Hi everyone, No change here. Was wondering if we should make GE do all the running. We don't mind it dragging on, but would like to get the direction we are going sorted! The FLA seems to think it is ok for one of their association members to add interest, send demands and send incorrect information through to CRA even though in dispute. Though not surprised The agreement has got flaws in we feel. > It should be multi-part contract as PPI is included in the loan? > There is nothing to indicate any potential fee that the business might have generated between the company selling the goods and GE. Which would be part of the loan? > As in the previous post, have they breached their own contract by not chasing the monthly instalment. Let them give us our day in court The agreement is at photobucket, but it could be put up as a zip for better quality? The 'mold' on the copy is what came from GE when we asked for a copy of the agreement. The value on page one are made up but proportionally correct. http://i1030.photobucket.com/albums/y369/carlyve/FNB/Page1.gif http://i1030.photobucket.com/albums/y369/carlyve/FNB/Page2.gif Thanks, The Oscars

Hi cerberusalert and thanks for the reply, That was going to be the final; you've had enough now 'go way' (there might be children watching ). I spotted that a few weeks ago and put it on the back burner. The Co-operative/Smile used to be really good at dealing with customers but there has been a marked decline in service. I think it is a case of starve investment, reduce staff and the good ones go so you end up with a bunch of script-reading kids manning the phones or answering letters. Any competent organisation could have resolved our problem within days. And their advertising about being "good with money" is bordering on a complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority as being untrue. Just look at all the negative reviews at Banking Guide: The Cooperative Bank (mind you those sorts of sites tend not to attract praise). Cheers,

Hi, Perhaps a starting point would be if we all tackled our MPs to raise the profile in Parliament. I would imagine that there is enough Caggers to blanket every single one? Then stage two over to your idea MDK.

Mainly for your info, to anyone in similar situation. This is the abbreviated version otherwise it would be too long. Sorry though it is still long enough . I think this is a General Debt post, sorry if it should be elsewhere, do feel free to move it if needed. The other half has a credit card with the (so called) ethical bank’s internet arm and was unwilling to post because of 'eyes'. Decided it doesn't matter now. Jan 2008 a letter was sent to inform them of our financial situation – not v.good. It took 9 months of writing letters and resubmitting Income and Expenditure forms to get a payment plan established for review in May 2009. During this period a request was made for copy Credit Agreement, (this was received and filed for later use). Also some questions were asked of the Bank. One in particular was while OH was on maternity leave/career break they raised the credit limit over 200%, without request, while family income dropped by half? This is irresponsible lending as this could lead to serious debt problems, plus it is interesting to note the Government are keen to have this practice stopped. As you can probably guess, to date this has never been answered. Before the end of the payment plan period they started chasing more payments! This was queried and eventually they admitted it was a mistake on their behalf. They then wanted to have fresh I&E forms and evidence. So while this was going on, the ammunition was pulled out. We told the Bank that CCA copy supplied previously, on inspection was not legible particularly on the terms and conditions. Two further copies later we still cannot read the copy properly; it is not ‘easily legible’. Even being scanned in and blown up it is not readable. So after more letter writing and no replies, the Bank was put on note that the account was disputed; ‘account in dispute’ letter sent. For a further six months we continued to make payments at a level we could afford. The bank still failed to provide a readable copy of the agreement, the account in dispute letter was sent several times more. During this time interest is being added, incorrect information is being sent to credit reference agencies and the Bank was demanding payment. We come to November 09 as we give the Bank an ultimatum. We will stop payment until correct CRA file information sent, wrongly added interest removed and demands for payment are stopped, (and proved legible copy of credit agreement of course). More demands come then 8th December a defective default notice arrives; it does not have 14 clear days allowing for payment. Termination is then received, dated 25th December. We respond with another letter that account is still in dispute and 1 further question: how can you issue a Termination Notice on Christmas Day? Due to the way the Bank Holidays fell this over the Christmas period in 2009 there was no postal service until Tuesday 29th December. Therefore the earliest I could have received this Termination was Wednesday 30th December, or 5 days later. This surely makes a mockery of the statement in this Termination Notice; “...the full, outstanding balance is now due immediately”? – No reply. We sent a reminder the following week – No reply. We send a letter to Chief Executive Officer. A few days later we receive the stand ‘we will investigate’ from the Executive Feedback team. Another week later we get the ‘we have done everything right’ type letter from the Bank. We respond again asking for all of our questions to be answered. – No reply A Debt Collection Agency writes 3rd February (Gothica) saying please pay. The response is sorry but your client is wasting your time, the account is in dispute. The DCA duly reply – the account is back with the Bank Something a bit odd happened, dated 5th February a latter arrived from the Bank which includes; "To give you the opportunity to manage you finance more easily, we are offering you the chance to settle the debt at a significantly reduced rate. Your account has been selected to receive a 50% discount off the balance outstanding, if you pay within 10 days from the date of this letter." We have never tried to avoid the debt; we just want the right, non-inflated amount to be paid back. We don’t have large sums of money sitting either in a bank or under the mattress but it so happens someone was willing to help and they stumped up the 50% and we have come to a separate arrangement. This was paid in at the local branch, (they tried to refuse at first but after a long ‘discussion’ the money was paid – it could be a thread of its own ;-) ). Yesterday the monthly statement was produced which was checked on-line and guess what – the Bank has deducted the payment, not closed the account and added interest. Anyway the Bank will be getting nice surprise in the next few days. The Financial Ombudsman Office now have a new complaint to investigate, (special delivery sent yesterday) and will no doubt be getting in touch with the Bank. Next instalment will be a lot shorter and probably in the next day or two. What ever you do, have a good day. Ttfn,

Aren't children financial black holes? You could have my two for an experiment in docklands if you like ;-)

Hiya, Tis over 30 weeks since the chasing DSA contacted me to say "...I have raised a direct query with our clients." I think this can be put to bed AOL never had a leg in the first place to try standing on ;-)

Hi everyone, 16 month later. About time we put another post on, we'll keep it shortish..... ....There has not been much change. The Finance and Leasing Association write to us putting G.E.Money's case. We write back saying answer the questions we have asked. A sort of ping pong with months between each go ;-) G.E. Money continue to add interest and send notes asking for money. We bounce them back via FLA. FLA have finally said: "The FLA has investigated the action of GE and has found no breaches of the FLA Code. I do not feel that we can assist you further in this matter. If you wish to pursue this dispute, I would strongly suggest that you seek independent legal advice. Because of the involvement of the FLA, GE has held your account outside of its normal collections procedure." When we ask the FLA about G.E.'s actions with Credit Reference Agencies, and the interest being added, asking for money - No comment. The stumbling block (apart from G.E.'s arrogance) is the lack of contact for 19 months: G.E. claim that they used our "Final settlement" cheque (from our point of view) They used it to run off against the monthly instalments! The FLA said this is common industry practice. It might be so but when the customer is informed! Our contention is G.E. have breached their own contract. It stipulates monthly payments. So as we stopped paying why did they not contact us when the money dried up? There is nothing in the contract that fits this situation as the FLA state. The closest we can see is "The customer may make payments under the agreement in addition to the required monthly repayment instalments. Unless the Customer specifies how any additional payment is to be treated, any such payment shall be subject to FNB's rights to credit payments to interest or capital as detailed in Condition 4." Unfortunately for G.E. we did specify what should happen with the cheque. "Enclosed is a cheque as final settlement for this loan." From that point on it was up to G.E. Money to come back to us and say this was not suitable. So as a payment was not made the following month; "The Customer must pay all repayment instalments to FNB as they fall due. If the customer does not, FNB may do the following. (a) If any repayment instalment is unpaid for more than 7 days after it became due, FNB may serve a notice on the Customer requiring payment before a specified date less than 7 days later and so on.... So we are waiting for a reply for FLA and if they can't give us a complete set of answers.... well we'll have to see, but Information Commissioner will be getting complaint (finally, as hoped FLA would do something) Ttfn,

Hi dx, Hopefully as the refund was sorted quickly they wont have bothered with info to CRA's. Will be checking soon though. Ttfn

Hi dx, Thanks for the reply. We've had the fee reversed. My concern was the the grey area that must be tripping up other people. Some might not be claiming it back so the likes of Santander have a revenue stream on the sly. Even though the payment was too late using their rules. They used the payment for the month it was supposed to be late for. I suppose it would be like turning up for a train after it was supposed to have gone to find it was still there on platform 4, (wrong sort of snow). You get on. The guard checks your ticket and throws you off for "missing" the departure time, plus keeps the ticket for good measure. ;-) If they can process the payment - what is it late for? Because they say so? Cheers

Perhaps I'm being a little on the slow side with this question, and if its been covered before – sorry for dragging it up again. If a store card has a 'minimum payment due date', when is the latest that a late payment can be included in the 'missed' statement? For example, wife has a Santander provided card for High Street store. The Minimum payment due date is 27th of the Month. Heres what happened: > Wife buys some goods from the Store's website 23rd November. > Makes part payment which arrives with Santander 2nd December. > Makes next part payment which arrives with with Santander 5th January. Now part of the problem is the statement received in December was not checked so this could have been spotted earlier :-| Any how it wasn't. The 1st payment even though it was received 5 days after the minimum payment due date, it was still included in the statement produced 2nd December. So wife though she had made payments for December and January, the way it ended up for Santander was she paid in November and January and duly got charged £12.00 late fee 27th December. This was argued vigorously and the fee was paid back, but the company maintains they are right. I am not so sure. In the contract the “minimum payment due date” is mentioned several times and what would happen if you don't pay on time but I cannot see anything that states late payment will be penalised with a charge but still be used to pay towards that months outstanding amount? It just seems the due date is just a arbitrary date picked by Santander. Surely Santander should do one of two things. Either Santander should count the payment received after the due date towards the next statement. OR make the 'minimum payment due date' the date the statements are produced then if the payment is received late it could not be included in the statement? Otherwise if a payment is received and goes into the statement but after 27th, what is it actually late for? Is it just me, but is this 5 day or so gap between the due date and the statement date being used cynically by Santander (and others probably) to generate income in an underhand manner?

Blimey, the last post in this thread was 783 days ago and it is still quiet -------------- Thought an update might be an idea. Short version ! > We parachuted out from Smile in Jan '08. > Disagreement rumbled on, still asked for case to be looked at on hardship grounds. > Had a payment plan in place for a few months > Final straw was the continued calling from the Bank and their power dialler. Half the time the calls when answered would be silent, so raised complaint to FOS, beginning of Feb '09 (Just over a year ago). > At that point the phone calls asking for money stopped. > The complaint went into a holding pattern and every so often we would get a note from FOS to say it was with a different adjudicator. > Recently been told will have an adjudication soon. > Early Jan '10 received mail shot type letter from Simon Crosby, Customer Feedback Manager which basically said our claim be rejected in light of Supreme Court ruling. Of course there was no mention that the Supreme Court had in fact suggested Regulation 5 of the UTCCR regulations could be worth looking at. So we fired back a letter saying we were waiting for FOS adjudication and depending on the outcome after that would look to recovery in the courts. Will post when something happens. Ttfn P.s. Does Val McCarren exist? I have noticed that if I ever write to her we never get a reply. Even though she is a prolific letter writer her self. I have to say that Smile/Co-operative seem to be getting worse for handling complaints and more arrogant with it.

Here, here

Very true Busby. But for Plama is there an actual debt or have they got a figure out of thin air, loosly based on what could have been billed if the account had continued - and it is this balance that is written off? As AOL only seem too good at is creative accounting for accounts that are closed. ;-)

I would agree with Locutus. I know my case is a little different, but I have not heard anything in 4 months having gone straight back to DCA saying I don't owe the debt.

Just a thought, to back up what Scouser7 said regards the verbal contract. The day of your second call to BT, 28th April. Is the call itemised on a bill? This would show you were calling BT and probably not to talk about the weather! I changed away from BT to Phone Coop and one thing they do have is usage check plus they send an email at 80% as well.

Thanks for the replies. Been quiet from my end as been a few days. Last week got email response from Roxburghe. Good Afternoon, Please be advised that I have noted your account with the details that you have provided below and I can confirm that I have raised a direct query with our clients. As soon as we hear back from our clients you will be informed accordingly. So might just go quiet for a while.......

Thanks for both posts, Locutus and Conniff. Will wait and see what the 1st approach does, then blast them….. Had in the post yesterday some junk mail from, guess who…. “Did you know AOL Broadband is now part of TalkTalk Group?” “Introducing TalkTalk’s best-ever phone & broadband package….” Seems odd that they’d want me back as a customer if I can’t even pay the existing bills (allegedly)

This will hopefully be for your information and delectation. Sorry it’s a bit long I changed ISP last year from AOL to Phone Coop. As I knew this was in the offing, a few months earlier I changed the bill payment type from a monthly charge against my DEBT Card to a monthly Direct Debit against my current account. The reason behind this was I could cancel the payment and not have months of trouble with AOL charging me for a service I no longer had. The contract had long since passed into a rolling month on month as the initial 12months had had long expired. At the end of October 2008 I got the standard “Your AOL broadband service has now been migrated” email: Dear AOL Member, Following your request to migrate your broadband service to another ISP, we can confirm that this process has now been completed. We'll therefore be closing your AOL Broadband account very shortly. If you are still within your 0 month minimum contractual period, any outstanding amounts due under your AOL Broadband Agreement will be debited from your payment method on or shortly after your next billing date, unless otherwise agreed. We want to thank you for being an AOL Broadband member. We're sorry that you've decided to leave… and other platitudes…. In November I received an email from AOL Collections: Dear Member, We are writing to notify you that because your Direct Debit mandate is not valid, we have not received this month's payment for services provided to you. Etc.... So a stiff phone call to AOL on 01179191100, (not using their 0870/0845 numbers). Initially the guy wanted me to make a payment! I had to ask several times what for, as AOL was not providing me with the service any more. Eventually the penny dropped and after talking to his team-leader the account was set to zero. I thought that was the end of it. Not so. Seven months later I get a letter from Roxburghe Debt Collectors. “Your debt has been passed to Roxburghe by AOL Broadband as they have been unable to obtain payment from you. All contact must now be made through these offices. You are now required to pay this debt in full IMMEDIATELY. As a debt recovery specialist we are looking to work with you to resolve this matter and would urge you to contact us so this can be achieved. …And so on… Jonathan Stock” So I have sent back an “I do not acknowledge this debt” email suggesting “Roxburghe get in touch with AOL and inform them they have made a mistake. One thing I do think is strange is you state AOL have tried to obtain payment! This is not true. I have not had any communication from AOL recently.” By the way I have had two email read receipts so I know they've had my email. I will update when I get any feed back if any.