Thanks. Hopefully I'm now qualified to PM you...

OK, well we are getting close to the point where one or both of us will have five posts so be able to use the PM facility. If you post a reply to this and I do the same to you, I think I'll be there.

Hi, PM is short for personal messaging. If you click on someone's name in a forum, in my case Lloydsintheframe, it takes you to a page. One of the options there is to send a personal message to that person. However on this forum it has been set up in such a way that a person can only send a personal message if they have posted at least five messages like the one I'm doing now on the forums themselves. This is only my third message so I can't PM you. If you also have posted only the messages I can see on this thread then you can't PM me either but if you have posted at least three more elsewhere on this forum you should be able to PM me. If you can''t PM me, what's your email address?

Thanks for your post - and congratulations on winning against the bank! I would appreciate it if you would PM me your email address as I'd like to know more about your case and keep in touch as mine develops. I would PM you, but apparently this isn't possible until I have at least five posts, and I don't want to go spamming the forum just for the sake of it.

I will keep the account of what happened to me brief, not least because it is now the subject of a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service and could yet end up in court. Several years ago I was one of three directors of a company that banked with LloydsTSB. We received advice from the bank's relationship director about the type of lending that was appropriate for the company and the level of risk that would be involved in signing the accompanying personal guarantees. The business experienced difficult times, as did many, in the latter part of 2008, and at that time we received further advice from the relationship director and also from a firm of 'turnaround experts' appointed by the bank to help us get the business back on an even keel. The initial advice proved to be incorrect - the lending package didn't have the claimed benefits, and the risks attached to the guarantees were much higher than stated. The subsequent advice turned out to be appalling - not only did both the bank and its advisors fail to recommend steps such as a CVA or debt for equity swap but they also obstructed our attempts to sell equity. We subsequently found out that the advisors were in fact a particularly disreputable firm of insolvency practitioners; with hindsight, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that they were brought in to take us into administration, probably in an attempt to cover up the previous mis-selling by the bank. We have subsequently been trying to extract a reasonable settlement from the bank reflecting the loss of our shareholdings in the business and the reduction in our respective incomes; the bank meanwhile is chasing us for settlement under the personal guarantees. The bank's position appears to be that it does not provide financial advice, and even if it does, it is not liable for any losses should that advice prove to be flawed. We never signed anything that indicated that the bank was not responsible for giving advice or for any flaws in advice given, and even if such a condition were buried in their standard terms and conditions we believe that the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 should apply. Has anyone been successful in making this case, ideally against Lloyds Banking Group but otherwise against a business bank in the UK?