subscribing

subscribing

subscribing

PS: sorry, meant to say INTEREST charges.

Well, I rang them again about these charges. The guy I spoke to reckons a formal demand is on its way and when that happens, they can take a fresh look at 'the whole situation' including charges. Thoughts anyone ?.

subscribing

an excellent thread.

Section 14 of the banking code mentions something about 'being sympathetic and working constructively with customers who have ran into difficulties'. Their interpretation of that is slapping interest on at 16.1%.

I'm starting up my own thread because I am after some serious suggestions and am seriously frustrated with the attitude of this bank. A few years ago, I had a 'life event' and my finances fell into dissaray. I'm now back working in a good job that pays OK and am on a DMP with PayPlan. I had a serious 4 figure overdraft at the time and this was 'rolled up' into my dmp but this bank just will not stop the interest accrueing on it. They have however, 'stopped charges' which is jolly decent of the given the whole subject of charges is subject to impending court cases. What i am paying in each month via the DMP doesn't even cover the interest so the figure is just growing and they are charging a whopping 16.1%. I have asked them in writing to reconsider. But they have sent me back a standard reply stating (sic) we have stopped charges, but interest will accrue as per the terms and conditions of the account, quite frankly, the reply was quite disgusting in that it was paying mere lip service to a genuine set of circumstances that I had sent in. I have pointed out to them they are not abiding by the spirit of the banking code but that seems to have fallen on deaf ears. Can anyone please suggest what I should do next ?.

subscribing

I sometimes wonder what these publicly funded bodies actually do, (TS, OFT, ombudsman, FSA etc etc). An interesting read is 'Squandered' by David Craig. It is endorsed by the taxpayesr alliance The TaxPayers' Alliance - Home This is the same lot that Heather Brooke is affiliated to, (she's the one who exposed the scandal regarding MP's expenses). The inference is this lot, are just waiting for their gold standard publicly funded pensions and whilst they're at it, are quite happy to do eff-all.

Fuzzybobble, that was a finely crafted ****take. the inflexion in his voice when you said it was a christmas card is priceless. I'll be chuckling in bed when I hit the sack later, just going over it again in my head again. Thank you for sharing it with us.

Can you please explain what is defined as 'hardship'. I'm on a DMP and Natwest are still charging me interest and what I pay them each month doesn't even cover that. My income and expenditure are such that my lifestyle is 'basic' and that is putting it mildly.

subscribing

Sorry fuzzybobble, this may sound a daft question. But would that cookie link a username on CAG back to the cookie originator ?.

subbing

subscribing

The complaint needs to go to the Law Society. However, it will need to be backed up with hard evidence. If what Palomino says is right then perhaps this forum is able to flush out victims of this blatant malpractice. Anyone ?

>>>Surely, misleading the court with false information is illegal and perhaps a counter claim against these idiots from Joe Public that have been penalised in this way should be organised? Surely, it should be possible to get a copy of the 'important paperwork' that we suspect went to your previous address from the court, compare the date on it from previous correspondence from BC, if later then that is incriminating. I wonder if there is a strategy for preventing this type of thing from happening in the first place ?. Fuzzybobble ?, anyone ?

subscribing

subbing

PS: Statutory Demand

Hear Hear ! nice one !.

subbing

Not quite. I beleive they lose this 'privelage' if they say: 'this call may be recorded for training and audit purposes', which they usually do.