I thought the principal of law was that they could not apply something like this retrospectively - i have at no stage agreed in any of my SLC agreements for them to share date with or look at my credit file.

I thought the principal of law was that they could not apply something like this retrospectively - i have at no stage agreed in any of my SLC agreements for them to share date with or look at my credit file.

I wrote to the OFT about this and asked advise - about who to complaint to, as it ties into the whole Barcalys Approach with there 'reserve' system. I mean the OFT etc has allready highlighted you are looking at £1.50 to £3 costs to the bank, so £12 reflects upto a constant 400% profit on there costs.....what kind of business model ever sustains that type of growth, the banks need to get a grip of reality. Maybe £5 tops, or better still a graded system starting at the near bare bones of £3.50 moving upwards....

Makes sense BB987 - missread the articles....lack of sleep due to contract negotiations!!! LAW!!! Lets see...

i note the debat about the "banks appealing to the House of Lord" What can we do if anything about that? i.e can we right to the Lords (i guess not) can we write to our MPs? MEPs? Chancellor etc etc? "to ask them to use there power not to allow such an appeal???"

Amazed....at 12k it must have been an MBA from an AMBA accrediated Uni.......and they only had 2 or 3 of those up to 2007.....now 10 to a dozen

I am writing on the behalf of my gf. FACTS: She lived in a shared property arranged through a letting agent. Her name was jointly on the utility bills. She left the property in 2007, and emailed the letting agent (has a copy of the email exchange) stating as she had now terminated the tenancy to remove her from all bills. 2 years later a DCA has traced her and is now claiming she owes £200 for a bill period when she was no longer living there. She has supplied all of the information to the DCA who is effectively not listening to her/believing her and says she is still liable. OPTIONS Write to the DCA and Thames Water stating again the explicit facts, stating she is not liable as per the evidence provided which she believes would satisfy a court and also copying the FOS Is this it? Anything else we could do? Thanks

not wanting to be a buzz kill, but the council will probably come back with response like: a) we inspect it regularly b) we last inspected it ... c) we make reasonable endeavours d) limited budget, thus cannot always fix everything all the time e) so we ain't gonna pay. Happenned to a mate of mine....but that said, might be wrong and best of luck

I am writing on the behalf of my gf. FACTS: She lived in a shared property arranged through a letting agent. Her name was jointly on the utility bills. She left the property in 2007, and emailed the letting agent (has a copy of the email exchange) stating as she had now terminated the tenancy to remove her from all bills. 2 years later a DCA has traced her and is now claiming she owes £200 for a bill period when she was no longer living there. She has supplied all of the information to the DCA who is effectively not listening to her/believing her and says she is still liable. OPTIONS Write to the DCA and Thames Water stating again the explicit facts, stating she is not liable as per the evidence provided which she believes would satisfy a court and also copying the FOS Is this it? Anything else we could do? Thanks

applying for the charges back is done in the same vane as Bank Charges. Though are they the £15 a pop charges or what? write in saying there are unlawful, that you have sent in forms they have lost and you want refund of charges + interest and the loan balance adjusted.

I have a Barratt New Build bought in Dec'06. One of the Double Glazing panes on the Sliding Patio doors has failed and has condensation and mould on it plus the plastic frame has discoloration due to water leakage. The 2 year warranty ran out in Dec'08 NHBC will not cover the glass (due to an excess) and the frame is not covered. Called Barratt and the Glazer Fitter/Maker has liquidated!! They are getting back to me on whether they can do anything. Assuming they can't what can i realistically do? Find out i guess if the warranty was insurance backed? Also i guess i could take the approach that it has failed almost exactly after 2 years (when the Barratt warranty ran out) and Barratt should take some responsbility. Thoughts please?

Thanks RB You're point is fair - i only claimed on this second theft as the car was burnt out, the 1st time it was simply driven for 400 yards and dumped, a police report was filed but that was it. I have no issues with them investigating either, just as you say when they effectively call you a liar... We'll see what happens!

Thanks LemonTwist I've posted AIG last letter ( [/url]) and my response ( and ) all of which i have sent to the FOS to. To add to the gaul of AIG (who i would NEVER insure with again even if my life depended on it) they are chasing me for insurance premiums. I was 4 months into a 12 month policy, paying monthly by direct debit. (letter to internal debt agency here - When the car was stolen and they started mucking me around I cancelled the policy (i had no car etc) and the conditions on the policy state they can take money from a final settlement to ensure they receive the premium, they would refund the premium if the claim is unsuccesful. Unreal!!!! I guess i am just going to have to stick to my guns on this one, any advise though is apprecaitted.

Sometimes i think (realize) that HSBC does not have a brain. They agree something with you then totally do something different. I have had very much the same problem with them. Agreed to start clearing my OD after a few months - they agreed not to remove my Debit Card Facility and then did exactly that 3 weeks later. They have no awareness of the law - with respect to the bank charges - they harrass and continue to make demands for payment when they have no legal write to do so.

My car was stolen some months ago and found burtn out - it is a write off. It was stolen 3 months earlier but recovered with minor damage. My insurance company has spent 3 months 'investigating' then refused to pay out (i have a scan of the letter but can't figure out how to post it in here???) The police investigated both thefts and closed the file in this 2nd case, also in the 1st case indicated it believed someone must have a copied/programmed key. The insurance company is basically saying in its letter that the theft did not occur as claimed and is thus not paying out. Can i do anything? This is wholly unfair.

Sure my response will bump this thread and get more response, but IMHO; A) Looking at face value of the evidence you have provided with GP letter and hospital information looks good B) Asking questions outside of the tape recording (when you are under caution) whether relating to information provided by paper is illegal. Same as it would be in a police interview. They can state, "for the sake of the tape Mrs XX has passed us a list of all resident abodes of her carer as requested" EVERYTHING needs to be on tape. C) I would suggest CAB or as you are disabled (i assume so) you would moer than likely be entiled to legal aid for a good solicitor, as there appears to be i) a bit of abuse of process i.e. talking off tape ii) harrassment and not good use of the councils time given your situation. My initial thoughts...

Sorry - My Real Name et al - been away. If you rolled up - yes you would see 1 pretty clear, and 2 less ambgious signs. I was visiting my friend who is given 2 passes to place in his or visitors vehicles are required. With regards to signage, i can do, though they have changed signs recently - from white background to YELLOW!

Ahh National Clamps the buffons of clamping and how to run a business legally.

I would not put in a CCA I would write back stating it is statue barred - there is a template on the forum

Such a valid point Buzby; i'd take them to court just on the basis of they way they behave and there attitude. It would be worth it regardless.

WELL DONE - A nice result for you. Very pleased there is justice and sensibility out there. All The Best

Good points guys A) my friend is a flat owner and holds 2 passes for the space supplied with his property B) I used to park there before the permit were issued and park there now (with a permit) C) I even sent a letter to NClamps with an accompanying letter from my friend setting out the situation as i have described here; i.e i went into get a pass and came back out, we even presented the pass to the clamper to ask him to see sense. D) Fine was £100 for release, i have reciept and copies of registered delivery of letter. E) They have now responded however when i threaten court; stating they have investigated thourghly, and they are not willing to entertain any correspondence. Though quite how they could investigage in a day is beyond me. F) The clamping is lawful as it is paid for by all in the block as part of the 'service charge'. Regardless of this we are talking about discretion given mitigation in place, and i think the evidence and facts here-in warrant some relief from the clamper (who are essentially on a money making exercise). They is no ombudsman that governs there complaints process and thus they can take advantage and be unfair in there actions; the only recourse is then court.

Yes, Yes - Cars will be clamped. At the end of the day if i am going to get a pass from my mate who lives in the flat and come out side and show the pass; not accepting it is in my view (and potentially the courts) bloody minded... If you parked on the street to go and get change you would argue the toss with a Parking Attendant as you buy the ticket.... Surely...

Some interesting points raised here all. A) The clamper would not release the car unless paid B) I complained there and then - showed the pass - he refused to remove unless paid C) Argue-ably he should have used discretion, but obviously saw money and the firm "national clamps" aren't well known for the complaints handling. D) I've written twice now and been ignored.

Short story. A) Went to a mates place B) Parked and went inside to get a apss C) We got chatting, and i came out with the pass and had been clamped D) Called the clamp guy - tried to explain - showed the pass E) Told i had to pay and write in F) Paid and wrote in, with a signed letter from my pal saying i had just gone into his flat to get a pass - clamper ignored the letter So, A) Plan is to again write in 'registered post' - same letter B) But saying if they don't respond i will issue summons for fine + cost etc. Sound reasonable? Any time limitation on this? I would imagine the same statute of 6 years to claim applies? Thanks