Cheers folks..........looking around the web however, opinion seems to be vague on the issue of Vanquis' Repayment Option Plan being PPI or not?! Anyone got a definitive answer to this? Dave

Hi All, Try as I might, I can't find a template for PPI SAR request letter and am not confident in writing my own. I have a 'Repayment Option Plan' with Vanquis that has been active from the beginning and is responsible for minimum payments never being enough to lower the balance. I would like to claim this back if possible but the online banking platform only allows 6 months of statements download. To this end, I need to send a SAR to get all the details. If anyone could help I'd be grateful. TIA DaveB

Hi, I have an ongoing loan with Welcome and believe I was missold the PPI but am finding the forum a little difficult to navigate to the help I need. Firstly. a) is there an online calculator that can help calculate what I may be owed and b) does it have instructions. Secondly, I have scanned in my statement from them and used OCR to extract the data into spreadsheet. would anyone be willing to take a look at this spreadsheet for me to analyse whether I have a case and point out what the various entries mean. In fact, I will post it here.......second thoughts, the forum can't take the data file so I will work on this. Anyway, Can someone guide me through this please Dave

thought so.....thanks:-(

Hi, Does anyone have an email address for SCM or their website link?

Hi All, I'm sure I'm not the only one attempting to find supporting evidence in the fight against these pirates but this is really interesting. The following text appears in the 2005 annual returns for Lloyds TSB (see page 8 of 44) Other income, net of insurance claims, on a comparable basis and excluding the strengthening of reserves for mortality, increased by £260 million, or 6 per cent, to £4,659 million. Fees and commissions receivable increased by 9 per cent to £3,315 million as a result of higher income from the strong volume growth in current account fees and an increase in fees from large corporate business and asset based lending, as a result of growing customer transaction volumes. The full link is here http:www.investorrelations.lloydstsb.com/media/pdf_ir/2005_ltsb_full_results.pdf This is prove positive, in any context, that the fees are part of their profit building regime!!! Hope this helps someone......I am certainly adding the text to my court bundle and statement of evidence. Interestingly, LloydsTSB refer to their charges as an impairment charge..............see some more text from this document... Our impairment charge expressed as a percentage of average lending increased to 0.66 per cent, compared to 0.61 per cent in 2004 (page 37, note 13). On a statutory basis, impaired assets totalled £4,122 million, compared with £3,515 million at 1 January 2005, representing 2.3 per cent of total lending, up from 2.1 per cent at 1 January 2005, but unchanged from 30 June 2005. Perhaps someone here with more knowledge and experience than me, could make more of this. Happy reading

Thanks a lot.............signing off now to collate..........watch this space!

Hi, How soon after I respond, do I contact SC&M? Do I need to re-submit my schedule...........I already did that in the early stages?

Many Congrats Gary:D and thanks for your input..........and encouragement

If the Defence is struck out, does this mean I win by default and LTSB will be ordered to pay up?

This was received today from the court. Notice of allocation to the Small Claims Track (Hearing) District Judge A******* has considered the statements of case and allocation questionnaires filed and has allocated the claim the the small claims track The court must be informed immediately if the cse is settled by agreement before the hearing date. Pleas see directions order attached Date 19 December 2006 ............ Upon reading the documents filed and of the Courts own motion. It is Ordered that: 1. This claim is allocated to the small claims track. 2 The Claimant shall by [28Days] crossed out and replaced by 12/1/2007, file and serve: (a) A schedule setting out each charge repayment of which is sought, showing the date, amount, and alleged reason, (ifany) for that charge being made; (b) Copies of any statement or other document relied upon as showing that each and every such charge has been made; © A statement of the Claimant's own evidence, if such is to be relied upon as tending to show that the alleged charges have been made, or that they are irrecoverable as penalties. If the claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim will be struck out without further order. 3. The defendant shall by [56 days] crossed out and replace by 9/2/2007 file and serve a response to the claimant's schedule, stating in respect of each item claimed: (a) Pursuant to what contractual provision such charge was made, producing a copy of the contractual document relied upon; (b) Whether such charge is accepted to be a penalty, and if not, why not; © If such charge is alleged to be a pre-estimate of the Defendant's loss incurred by the Claimant's actions (whether or not such action is to be treated as a breach of contract between the parties), all facts and matters intended to be relied upon as showing that such is a proper estimate of such loss, and all evidence to be adduced at trial as to what the true cost of dealing with the matter was. If the Defendant fails to comply with this order, the Defence will be struck out without further order. 4. Decided cases and other legal materials should not be filed, but brought to the hearing with additional copies for the court and the opposing party. 5. List for hearing next available date after 10 weeks, time estimate 1 hour, reserved to District Judge A********. 6. This Order has been made by the court of it's own initiative, without hearing the parties or giving them opportunity to make representations. Any party affected by the order may apply to have it set aside, varied or stayed. Such and application must be made not more than 7 days after the date on which the order was served on the party making the application. .........pheeeeeewww To those reading and that are in the know on these things, is there anything in this order that is unusual or that |I should be worried about

Yeehaah,..........well, almost. Got response today from the courts and NO I don't have to submit another AQ.. The District Judge has allocated my case to the small claims track and has set a date of 21st Feb 07 at 2pm for 1 Hour. would like some assitance here though, ist it ok to transcribe the contents of the direction order here?

Excel guarantee, specifically that they are NOT a DCA. Can't see that it would harm any, think I will make appointment if only to satisfy curiosity. Cant help wondering if this is a new ploy though........any comments?

sorry about the split ehmm threads? new to forums!

I would have found it impossible to file AQ during the period given as I had zero funds! (apart from what the bank owes me) What would I put in this second AQ anyway? just re-iterate the first?

I already filed a provisional AQ at the earlier stage....sorry but my tracking of this claim has been disjointed due to being so amazingly busy.

I am thinking that if I don't agree to see Excel, the courts may take the view that I am not willing to attempt negotiation. Then again, why should I.ITS MY MONEY

Banter was the wrong word to use....in fact my entire post was hurried and ill thought out. The concept of finding time is wonderful, however, since being made redundant for the 5th time in 6 years, I have started a business which, after a year of complete frugality, is beginning to bear fruit. This has meant 20 hour days, 7 days a week....unhealthy, I know! but necessary. This is the main reason for finding it difficult to find time. (not to mention having no internet for some time and having to watch the cost of every phone call. Even as I speak, I have done 14 hours without lunch and now have to sit up through the night to finish a design job. It's my choice and I am not begging sympathy....not my style. Just pointing out that sometimes, other things have to take priority for the good of the future. I am well aware, on this subject, how important it is to manage finances well and that my financial fate with regard to these thieves can only rest in my hands and believe me, I will not allow the little 888***8*s to take me again.

Hi Guys (&gals), I need urgent help regarding my LTSB Claim. On 24 October, I received a " STANDARD ORDER FOR STAY FOR SETTLEMENT WITH CONSENT OF ALL THE PARTIES" It reads: Deputy District Judge Martin orders that this claim is stayed until 11 November 2006 to enable the parties to attempt settlement. On or before 25 November 2006 one of the following steps must be taken: either the claimant must notify the court that the whole of the claim has been settled; (see note (i) below) or the claimant or defendant must write to the court requesting an extension of the stay period, explaining the steps being taken towards settlement and identifying any mediator, expert, or other person helping with the process. The letter should confirm the agreement of all the other parties. (see note (ii) below) or all the parties must file a completed allocation questionnaire at the court. Where a settlement of some of the issues in dispute has been reached, a list of those issues should be attached to the completed questionnaire. This list must be agreed with the other parties and must indicate that it has been agreed. Date 11 October 2006 (+notes) Now then, on 20th November, I wrote to the court to inform them that SCM had made no attempt to mediate or negotiate, only that they continued to write to me about the debt?!? demanding re-payment. I received no response to my letter and have written again to the court asking for instructions. Their reply was We acknowledge receipt of your faxed and emailed letter dated 10 December 2006. I regret that to date I have not been able to trace receipt of your letter dated 20 November 2006. The file together with your letter of 10 December has now been referred to the District Judge for case management directions. XXXXXX Judgements Section. To date, I have had no further reply. The way I look at it is that I did not file an AQ by the 25 November when I should have done. In the meantime, Excel Counselling Services has been appointed, (after 25/11) who wish to meet with me to "discuss my borrowings with their client" HAVE I FLUFFED MY CASE COMPLETELY? CAN I RECOVER THE SITUATION AND PROGRESS MY CASE? SHOULD I AGREE TO SEE EXCEL? PLEASE SOMEONE HELP ANSWER THIS POST

The advice re: standing orders is all very well when the amount doesn't change. All the banter about the account management methods we can all use is fine but presupposes we all have the time to commit to such things. I myself would love to have the time but just don't have, I struggle to find the time to input into this forum which is probably why my claim has taken almost 6 months already. I simply believe, perhaps naively, that the banks should act with mutual best interest and generate trust in them by being helpful.

Hi, LTSB didn't request the stay to my knowledge.......the District Judge Martin at Leicester County court ordered the stay to "give both parties opportunity to resolve the dispute" (or words to this effect) I will phone the courts first thing AM.thanks all.

How naive of me........the decision on which to bounce is not arbitrary at all.....they would simply bounce the one that gained them the most charges and interest...DUHHHHH

Hi All, hopeI'm posting correctly here. I have a suggestion for a 'TRUE' service that I think most of us would happily pay for. Like many, I have had occasions when a clash of DD payments have arrived for processing on the same day and the total has exceeded available funds. The problem is, that in this situation, the payment refusal system seems to be entirely arbitrary and, like many, my most important payment, my Mortgage, has been the one that sufferd. It would be great to see a system of prioritising where the customer can prioritise payments from their account. This would leave the least important of our payments unpaid and alleviate a lot of the worry over missing the important ones. Ok, so the agreement would have to be that a charge of some description would have to be made if it was the prioritised payment that took you over a limit, but at least it's worth the fee or charge (not withstanding that the fee should reprsent the true costs to the bank of course) for the peace of mind. I would much rather pay a fee for allowing my mortgage payment than bouncing it in favour of a magazine subscription and still pay a fee as well as having to explain and suffer a charge from my mortgage company as well. This type of arrangement would be easy for the banks to manage with their systems and would improve customer relations etc...etc..

ohhhh s**t........ sorry natwest........wires totally crossed thru lack of sleep....was GHM comments were aimed at.....humble apologies; gulp

Hi, just to clarify, I was aiming my comments at natwesttookmymoney BUT NOT for the purpose of insiting anger.......merely to point out that we are not all blessed with sufficient income or discretionary spending power to keep ourselves out of the bank's clutches ad infinitum; to think otherwise is somewhat naive and arrogant....once again, sorry to offend. and yes, I think this thread is spent......