dx, surely Mr. Bean doesn't have penalty charges? I thought the £90 per month he is talking about are the Halifax fees, authorised overdraft over £3000 at £3 per day. Therefore a BCOBS complaint would be pointless. Unfortunately the front line monkeys have no more authority than to go "click, click, computer says NO!" That is why I suggested you should try going into a branch and ask to speak to a higher level manager (you do need to get past the first level monkeys there as well). You don't say what the original term on the loan was, so it's difficult to say roughly how much would be outstanding, however note that you would want to borrow over £6000, as that is the threshold at which the far more favourable APR kicks in. As for the comment about adding a note to your account so no-one else would offer you any further lending options, well I think that is outrageous. Especially if that was a front line telephone customer service agent. Slightly different if you had been transferred through to a member of the underwriting team, but it seems that the days when that could happen have passed with the Halifax.

Unfortunately for you the words "Halifax" and "sympathetic" are not ones I would expect to see in the same sentence. How much longer does the £3500 loan have to run? If there's not much longer left then hopefully you could survive paying the overdraft fees until that time, then have the extra £160 per month to reduce your overdraft with. Alternatively I would suggest going into the branch and try to see one of the senior people there about a personal loan to consolidate your overdraft and existing personal loan. As a quick example £7100 over 3 years gives monthly repayments of about £220 per month. The representative APR for this is 7.4%, as opposed to 24.9% for your loan of £3500.

I would also suggest it might help to SAR MBNA, that should turn up the list of DCAs they appointed to deal with the matter, and thus might prompt your memory of whom you paid.

From my understanding of the process what will happen next is that HMCTS will send you (well your husband) a letter about the tribunal. This will possibly be about 2-3 weeks after the DWP have passed your appeal onto them. Part of this letter from HMCTS will include a form for you to return, and part of this form is whether you want to attend the tribunal in person to present your case, or let it consider the evidence on paper. Since you say you will not be able to get your husband to travel to the tribunal you would indicate on the form that you want them to consider the evidence on paper, and submit with it your complete summary of the case. (And yes, the DWP do seem to be quite capable of ignoring other evidence contained in your appeal letter to them, and stating in their evidence to the tribunal that there wasn't any.)

Personally I disagree with Emmzzi. If the new contract has been signed by the company as well as yourself then they should honour what they say your salary is. (I presume here from the title of your thread that you are not being paid the amount stated in your contract, even in the form of bonus payments on top of your basic over the past 21 months?) Are you in a union? If so, get them involved (it may affect all the re-written contracts). Otherwise I would suggest querying it with HR rather than (or maybe as well as) your immediate line manager.

Nickyy, I am really sorry to hear that your Mam has been well and truly stitched up by Barclaycard on this matter. I am presuming here, based on what you have said, that they got your Mam to set up a direct debit to cover the minimum payment each month. I also presume that the payment made you have detailed from the statement is the minimum paymant. Doing some arithmetic on those numbers it seems the minimum monthly payment is set at 2.4% of the outstanding balance, with the monthly interest rate set at 2.207%. You can see how close those numbers are, and that explains why it is going to take a very long time for your Mam to pay this off if she only ever makes the minimum repayments each month. As to what you should do, well I would suggest the following: If there is still PPI being charged cancel it immediately (you will see it as an entry on the transaction detail page of the statement); If your Mam, or you, or another member of your family can afford it, make an additional payment each month over and above the minimum being collected by the direct debit. As CitizenB says, even £10 a month will drastically reduce the time this is going to take to be paid off; Get you Mam to send a Subject Access Request to Barclays (fee £10), this will get you full details and history of the account, and will therefore show you if PPI was being paid in the past, and whether it has been reclaimed. If you do not know how to do a SAR then ask, someone will point you to the templates; Your next steps then somewhat depend on what the SAR shows, but as dx100uk suggests that may well be a letter appealing to their better nature (ha!) asking them to write the balance off.

And to TheAnalyst I would still maintain that your approach should be to be asking for the full amount of the PPI claim to be repaid to you at this stage. I would not start by talking about this 75% calculation with Welcome.

Hortz, I believe you are mistaken. Welcome does still exist. From the Companies House website: Name & Registered Office: WELCOME FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED KINGSTON HOUSE CENTRE 27 BUSINESS PARK WOODHEAD ROAD BIRSTALL, BATLEY WEST YORKSHIRE ENGLAND WF17 9TD Company No. 00133540 Status: Active

Yes a £30,000 loan over 25 years (300 months), interest rate initially 5.99% fixed for 5 years, then SVR, which at that point was 6.84%, really does mean you would be paying £31k in interest.

I would guess your second personal loan had a 16 digit account number? They managed to get the documentation correct on those (it was a different part of NR to the mortgage section), therefore these loans do not feature in the redress situation. As for your final sentence I think the quote "never ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by incompetence" covers it! I would also have redacted their reference and the little row of numbers above the address box.

Well that would be your secured mortgage of £104,500, plus the unsecured loan of up to £30,000 (even though you had only asked for an initial drawdown of £12,000 on it). As this is a Together Mortgage you should be due redress because of their CCA2006 failures. I would suggest you write a formal complaint to them on this. It seems possible that since this has been recorded as an unsecured loan of potentially £30k (even though only £12k was drawn down) that NRAM have excluded it from redress. Finally I don't quite understand what you are referring to regarding a previous loan you held until 2009? Was this a seperate unsecured loan?

As this was only settled in early 2008 it should still be on your credit report. What does it state there ("settled", "part settled", something else)? Also do you have a copy of any letter you might have sent them with your payment of £1200 in F&F? I wouldn't get into complicated arithmetic with them, and showing a willingness to accept less than the full amount of PPI only gives them a chink to try and open wider. Insist on them repaying you the full amount of ~£2200 as per their calculations.

Hello there Smater_now, it's very interesting to hear your story. I do wonder though how did NR manage to get all the way through court action to obtaining a CO without you knowing? Surely the court would have served papers to your address? I will be very interested in seeing what their response is to your complaint.

CitzenB, for yours (and anyone else's) edification a Northern Rock Together Mortgage was comprised of 2 components: A secured mortgage up to 95% LTV, repayable on repayment or interest only terms, with a term up to 30 years (at least, I think it couldn't go beyond your 75th birthday); An unsecured loan up to 30% LTV, capped at a maximum of £30,000, repayable on repayment terms, co-terminus with the mortgage component, and at the same interest rate. The specific problem being addressed here is that they used the same paperwork for all Together mortgages, showing the unsecured component as being regulated by CCA1974. This was so even for those borrowing in excess of £25,000, even though at the time the upper limit for CCA regulated loans was £25,000, which was not removed until April 2008, a date either after or near the end of the life of the product being offered. It seems there are quite a lot of people in this position of having "unregulated" loans written on "regulated" paperwork, and NRAM (as they are now) have declined to offer us the same redress for their failue to comply with the statement requirements of the CCA2006 amendments as they have given to those with loans under the threshold. Another problem that these Together mortages have is that if you de-couple the components (because of re-mortgaging for instance), the interest rate on the unsecured component jumps to 5% or 8% above SVR, thus dramatically increasing the repayments. Also there are instances where, in the past, Northern Rock or NRAM have used the provisions of the CCA to take people in financial difficulties to court for non-payment of the unsecured component, including obtaining Charging Orders, despite the fact they are now saying they are not CCA regulated. This is why the OP is trying to contact the 2 people mentioned. Finally in a post on 6th December 2008 pt2537 stated "the Northern Rock Together scheme is flawed, the agreement is not bolted together properly and as a result it is defective and irredeemably unenforceable". How I wish he was still around to elaborate further on that statement!

Well not really. What someone seems to have done is treat your request as one made under CCA1974. As a mortgage they are correct, it is not regulated under CCA1974, however there will be a mortgage contract/agreement, regulated by the FSA I believe. Also if you really took out your original mortgage in 1982 for a term of 24 years you would have finished paying it in 2006, so something has happened if it still has over 15 years left to run. Did you ever get into difficulties and agree to a change in term for reduced repayments? the dates for your additional borrowing do just about add up.

Argh, why can't people read the original post?

Well I don't know what it was that I said in my letter to Lowell, but M&S agreed to take it back from them. M&S then proceeded to write me a long letter stating all the same stuff they had said previously, prior to us reaching stalemate and them deciding to sell it to Lowell in the first place! As you say, it is interesting to observe M&S's reluctance to go to court on the matter.

Hello Tezza. Unfortunately for you the current NRAM issue relating to redress for interest charged while not sending out compliant statements comes from new legislation introduced in the consumer Credit Act 2006, and which was implemented in October 2008. As you have redeemed that Together mortgage before then, and in fact over 6 years ago now, I don't really feel you have a case.

Interpretating a Welcome statement is a bit of a black art. They seem to have this ability to have multiple statement lines relating to the same transaction. You need to work your way through carefully, noting the lines that affect the balance outstanding, to reach an understanding of what the statement really means. However, as Slick says, letter fees are reclaimable, as are phone call fees, returned payment fees, and outside visit fees, etc. What are the sort of amounts are these "Fee Assessment Charges"? If they are round pounds then I would say they are reclaimable. If not I would surmise they are interest on the charges, and wouldn't specifically reclaim them, instead letting the interest calculations on the spreadsheet take care of them.

Hello PT. If first litigation was in late 2009, when did you last make any payment? Knowing the slow speed at which these things tend to happen, particularly when it has to reach the state of being sold on, I am obviously thinking in terms of it becoming statute barred, hopefully sometime soon, if not already.

Dpac, did you ever get anything in writing from the court about the strike out?

A loan of £15,000 (amount of credit/cash advance); A broker fee of £1,500; An acceptance fee of £235. The latter two figures being in the right range for that amount of credit. The difference between the illegible copy and the reconstruction being Welcome's realisation that the original was wrong. However, it does not explain why £15,094.25 was received in your bank account!

Hello EOS-5D. See the responses in Still_surviving's thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?224659-HSM-v-M-amp-S-Credit-Card&p=4170001#post4170001.

Hello SS. It seems that M&S (HSBC) have an annual new year sale of old debts! Mine was sold to Lowell about this time last year. Presuming the letter you have is from Marlin and they are inviting you to contact them to come to some arrangement to pay then a letter to them as suggested by Fletch70. You may wish to add a CCA request to that, but the account is already in dispute. I didn't use CCA but instead used the UTCCR question "do you or the OC have a the original signed agreement in your possession?".

Hello Janet. It's very strange for Welcome to tell you "not to worry", the problem is people rightly have concerns when sent statements and letters that don't seem right. The thing is with the CCA s.77 request that you have sent them all they are obliged to send you in return is a copy of the agreement and a statement of the current position with the account (that is balance outstanding, monthly payment, how many more months to run). Now it is possible they may send you a more detailed statement, but they don't have to. Now, since 2008, they should have been sending you fully detailed statements at least annually. It seems as if you haven't been getting these? When they respond to your CCA request I can see two possibilities. The first is that it shows the loan will be paid off in 2014 (rather than 2013 as it seems it should). You may then decide that is acceptable to you, you keep paying (even though you will have paid them more than expected) and it all goes away next year. Or you may decide it isn't acceptable and you want to do something about it. The other possibility is that it shows the loan still has some time to run, which isn't acceptable to you. If you wish to take it further I would suggest you need to make a subject access request (fee £10), specifically stating that you want it to include a full statement of account from inception to the current day. This will then show you what has been going on (and the computer notes can make interesting reading too!).