Actually, would just qualify this advice - it's quite likely that M&S, like several high street stores - rotate security tapes on a weekly basis, so a letter is NOT a good route to take as by the time they've received and responded the original tape is likely to have been overwritten. That's how it worked when I worked in shops several years ago - we'd overwrite the tape from 7 days ago and continue on a rolling basis. Get the police involved asap and they can chase M&S for you.

Sorry, I meant to say that the data holders are obliged to share data even if its private, if the law enforcement agences require it. DPA privacy rules don't apply in that situation.

Yes - contact the police as it's a crime not to report an accident or leave details. Second - once you've contacted the police, M&S are legally obliged to provide the information as Data Protection Act doesn't apply when data is asked for (by the police) for law enforcement purposes. Just a word of advice from someone who has asked the police to release CCTV footage before (when our house was burgled) - they seem very lazy and won't bother asking for the footage unless you can be quite specific with your time periods. If you can say 'I was in M&S between 1:30 and 1:45' then they're much more likely to look into it than if you give them a three hour window (as they don't want to devote resource into watching hours of footage). So, do both of those things above and you can get your CCTV footage released to the police. Then moan to the police and tell them to pull their finger out but be prepared for them to say 'we don't have the resource to look at the tapes'. I believe there is a national compensation fund for accidents where the driver has sped off, but not sure if it applies in this case.

Hi Bach and thanks for you advice. I've already gone through most of these steps, but actually I do not really need a copy of the credit agreement for this one as I'm not challenging the agreement per se, but the way they put it together and offered it to me in the first instance. It's really frustrating: everyone I speak to all agrees that Barclays haven't done things in the right way, apart from the woman who is handling my complaint. She won't actually pick up the phone and call me to ask me to explain the letter; instead, she just skim reads whatever I've said and then replies to a few bits that she misinterprets. What's wrong with calling and speaking to customers? I've asked her to do this about 20 times now. I've got no idea where this complaint is heading as it's dragged on for a long long time (since 2006) and I just want closure on it. More importantly, I want the £2.5k back that I shouldn't have paid!

Hello, I really am totally depressed and sick to death of dealing with this complaint, which has now been running for years, not months. I just don't seem to be getting anywhere, so please can someone help point out my options? I've posted about this elsewhere and before, so I'm going to set out the facts again clearly so you can see what has happened. In April 2005 I took out a Barclays Graduate Loan for £10,000, repayable over 5 years. The interest rate on this was 7.9%. Unbeknown to me, Barclays added PPI to this (around £1,700) and so the starting balance was £11,700, all attracting a nice healthy amount of interest for them. It wasn't until January 2006 that I got my loan documents through, at which point I noticed that PPI had been added. I went into my branch and challenged them on this: I said I didn't need it, didn't ask for it and accused them of mis-selling it (which I believe is true: I was unemployed at the time of taking it out, I didn't consent to it, it was single-premium and I already had existing cover through my job offer). To their credit, they said they would remove the PPI. However, this is where things went disastrously wrong: The branch I visited had never dealt with a graduate loan before, as they are based very much in the city and were more used to commercial enquiries. What they did was as follows: The closed the old loan (with PPI) down The made me open a new loan (without PPI) to replace the old one - but this was for a balance of £10,000. They refunded me £1,200ish to my current account This 'restructuring' process took 2 months from start to finish, so I received a further 'goodwill gesture' of £300 refunded - this related to the PPI I had paid whilst the restructure was taking place. This was concluded in March 2006. So, to recap, from April 2005 to March 2006 I had made 7 payments of £242 towards my loan, which totals £1,694. I had only received a refund, however, of £1,502. Now here's the key issue that I have spent many months battling with Barclays about: I have spent a huge amount of time investigating the way in which Barclays restructured my loan to remove PPI, and I have identified some really serious problems: Firstly, the refund I received was less than the amount I'd paid Secondly, I don't think they should have made me take out a 'new' loan Third, the length of the new loan was longer (7 years) than the old one (5) And fourth: this is the big bit: When Barclays refunded me £1,502, I believe (and have spoken to Barclays staff to confirm this) that what they should have done is applied this refund to the loan balance, rather than refunded it to my current account. This is really very important, because of the way compound interest is calculated on my loan. Because Barclays refunded PPI to my current account – rather than refunding payments to the loan balance – the capital sum of my loan was not reduced. As a result, the interest it incurred and will incur on the lifetime of the loan means that actually I will end up paying more in interest than I will have received through any refund, so actually, Barclays are making more money out of me than they ordinarily would have, just because of the way they have restructured the loan. Or, in other words, Barclays should have retrospectively applied my 7 payments of £242 to a starting balance of £10k in 2005, which would have given me a balance of £8,273 in 2006 (when the loan was restructured) and would have then given me a balance of £3,457 today. Instead, my balance today is £5,782 because of the high compound interest created by retaining the high capital figure at the beginning of the loan term, so although I have been refunded £1,502, my loan is actually £2,324 higher than it ‘should’ be. Or, put simply: Barclays have refunded me £1,502 on the one hand, but the way they’ve restructured the loan has then cost me an additional £2,324, so I’m materially down by £1,014 at this point today. By the end of the loan, the amount I’m down will be even greater – and will exceed the £1,502 that Barclays ‘refunded’ to me, so actually Barclays are profiting from the restructure and I am down to the tune of about £2k. Like I said, I have spent many months dealing with Barclays on this and they keep avoiding the question or not replying to my complaint. No-one seems to understand what I'm getting at, although they do seem to understand that the way they 'refunded' PPI to me was incorrect. I am tempted to now instruct a solicitor to take legal action on my behalf for this, but I'm loathe to give them money which I believe is rightfully mine. I'd be happy if they could claim additional costs against Barclays, but that's not how it works. Please could someone help me? I am so depressed with this whole sorry affair and feel like giving up. It's totally drained me emotionally and I can't stand it anymore. It's making my life hell and I just wish Barclays would employ someone with an ounce of IQ who could understand the complexities of my case and actually put me in the position I should now be in legally. I'm very tempted - quite genuinely - to take some kind of drastic action to get a response from Barclays, whether that's supergluing myself to the doors of their office or protesting...I really want an answer. Please help!

You're all absolutely right. The new loan was over a longer term (7 years compared to 5) as the staff member told me that 'that' just how it's set up - you can always come back and readjust it to 5 years at a later date if you want to). At the time, I was very much told 'this is the only way to do it' and I had no choice - and in fact, there's no way I could have questioned their actions as I'm not a Barclays member of staff - I'm just a customer: how am I supposed to know how the restructuring of a graduate loan works? Overall, by my calculations, they will make more money in interest from me than they will have refunded, so my asking for PPI to be removed has actually cost me money, rather than saving it. I guess I just want to know whether I have a claim against them, as the total amount of PPI yet to be refunded is quite small (around £200). That's not the issue so much here: it's more the process by which they've then restructured the loan to my detriment.

Thanks for your response. It was my understanding that this is how Barclays ALWAYS process PPI refunds - and that they only way they can do it is to take out a new loan for the old one. Are you able to point me at the particular FSA Guideline that's relevant here, as I can't seem to find anything online or on their website. I'm going to write to complain, as I think I've been shafted.

I just visited my local branch and was told my one of the 'older' members of staff that my maths are right and that the loan was restructured incorrectly. However, because I 'accepted' the refund (although I didn't have any choice) I may be in a precarious position.

I'm posting as a follow-up to my other thread: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/payment-protection-insurance-ppi/226540-ppi-totally-confused-barclays.html Let's say I have a loan for £10k (which I do) and PPI was added up-front to this (£1.7k) making the total at the start of the loan £11.7k. If I went into the bank after one year and said 'I believe I was mis-sold PPI', having made several payments towards that loan, what specific process should the bank go through to remove PPI from that loan? As in: what's the step-by-step process? I'm trying to dig deeper and find out what has gone wrong with my loan. I was just under 1 year into a 5 year loan @ 7.9% (£242 per month) - the figures were as above. The bank refunded me £1,502 at the time (having paid £1,694 in payments already), and took out a new loan (without PPI) to replace the old one (that had PPI), but the new loan was for the same starting balance as the old one. Would this be the correct procedure? Or, should the banks have retrospectively applied my payments to a starting balance of £10k on the old loan? What I'm trying to get at here is this: I believe I am financially down by over £1k because of the way Barclays removed PPI on my loan - and by the end of the loan term, Barclays would have actually made more profit from me than they refunded. In 2006, 1 year after having the loan, I asked for PPI to be removed (as I wasn't aware it had been added until then). Barclays obliged, but I think what they should have done is said: "Right, well as the PPI was mis-sold then the original loan should have had a starting balance of £10k, not £10k+PPI" "The customer has made 7 payments of £242 already, so let's apply those to the £10k loan, which gives us a balance today of £8,273" "So, the new loan (without PPI) should start with a balance of £8,273" Instead, what they did is give me a refund - and not a full refund either - which I was prevented from applying to my loan. So, it reverted back to £10k and as a result incurred much more interest. As it happens I'm about to pay it off in one chunk, but actually my sums suggest that: If I'd started from £8,273 my loan balance would be £3,457 today Instead, because it started from £10k, my balance is £5,782 today So, I'm 'down' by £2,324. Given my PPI refund was short by £192 and I've already been refunded £1,502, it means I am today materially short by £1,104 by their actions. So, Barclays have given me a refund of £1,502, but because of the way they've restructured my loan it's cost me £1,104 more to-date and by the end of the loan period - by my projections - I will have been charged more than £1,502 extra interest so actually, Barclays have PROFITED from my asking for my PPI to be removed. I just wondered if anyone could look at this and tell me whether Barclays did act in the right process when they removed the PPI? I currently have a solicitor looking at my case who thinks I do have a claim not just for the mis-sold PPI but for the compound interest loss as described here, but the maths is complicated and I'd rather trust opinion on this site on matters of financial accuracy.

Thanks for all your advice - I tried calling Barclays today to ask them to explain their letter but the woman who sent it is on holiday this week and no-one else seems to understand what anything means! Is there a maths whizz out there who could help work out the total amount I'm down by because of this?

I'm confused by what they mean when they say I received a refund to my current account. I didn't - and in practice how could I? If I take out a loan for £10k then they give me £10k, but if they apply PPI it means I owe an extra £1700 on top - it doesn't mean I have £11700 in my account. Why would they 'refund me' the £1700 to my current account if I haven't paid it yet? I've only made 7 months worth of payments, so yes, I'm owed some PPI back, but not the full amount. They've attached ledgers to their response, showing the breakdown of payments: 20 May 05: Account opened. Opening balance = 10,000dr 20 May 05: PPP (£1,786) added. Balance = 11,786dr From May - Sept there was a payment holiday 20 Jun 05: Interest added. Balance 11,864.52 dr 26 Sept 05: Interest added. Balance 12,112.21 dr In September, payments (£242.10) started taking effect: 30 Sept 05: Balance 11,870.11 dr 31 Oct 05: Balance 11,628.01 dr 30 Nov 05: Balance 11,385.91 dr 19 Dec 05: Interest added. Balance 11,595.00 dr 30 Dec 05: Balance 11,352.90 dr 30 Jan 06: Balance 11,110.80 dr 1 Mar 06: Balance 10,868.70 dr 20 Mar 06: Interest added. Balance 11,085.83 dr 30 Mar 06: Balance 10,843.73 dr It's at this point I went into the branch to remove the PPI. Here's what happened to the loan (according to the ledger): 28 Apr 06: Credit of 10,000 made to the loan. Balance = 843.73 dr 2 May 06: Credit of 935.05 made to the loan. Balance = 91.32 This 91.32 was the interest from March to May, so was removed from the account (as shouldn't have been applied, it seems), so: 3 May 06: Balance = zero and account closed I don't have the ledger from the new account, but I can see from the letter (and my own records) that when it starts in May, the opening balance was 10,000. So, I'm back to square one.

Thanks for your help - I was completely confused by it all. When Barclays said they have partly upheld my complaint it would have been helpful if they'd said what they meant by upheld. If a complaint is upheld, you would have thought that something happens as a result.

Thanks for your reply. In their letter, they said that this would be their final response - so I'm assuming I can now take this straight to the FOS?

Hi PF - thanks for this. This is exactly what I think too - but Barclays' letter didn't really make much sense. I did request a full repayment of PPI, but the letter side-stepped this so I'm going to write back and demand it. There are really two issues here: one is that I should have the PPI refunded, but also the new loan should have been for a lower amount.

Can anyone help?