No I do not believe it does, because they were reimbursed before the loss actually occurred...unless I suppose they measure their loss hour by hour, which I guess is possible... Still like I say, I suppose the best plan is to ask for some leniency and pay up if required and make sure I keep an eye on it in the future... mrbrooks...

Hi CagBmn, thanks for the heads up, Yes applies to me i think, I have not been outside my OD, and the account was brought within credit the same day. I did not however request an informal OD, the bank simply paid the £9.08 I also read something in the section about refusing payments that said cleared funds should be in the account before 12pm on the day of payment, I think I was just outside this time frame. I have other bank accounts, Barclays for example and my GF has an account in NatWest where both banks in this same situation have waived any charges because the account was brought into line before the close of business. I suppose this is the bank showing some goodwill and sense...which of course I appreciate... Anyway thanks again for the input... mrbrooks

Hi renegadeimp, thanks for the reply, Aye that's what I think too...And I do feel it is unfair... mrbrooks

Hi CagBmn, thanks for the reply, I agree that the bank deserve compensating IF they have suffered a loss, but this is not so, they have suffered no loss, neither have they been caused additional work as the message is entirely automated, they ended the day no worse off than when they started it, as far as I can see... Still I suppose you are right, I agreed to the T+C so I suppose they can lawfully do whatever they wan to us and we should not argue back,simply because we agreed to it. Whether it is fair or not. I will probably pay it and just keep a closer eye on matters in the future... mrbrooks

Hi all, I have a question for you... A few days ago, on the 31st Dec, I made a purchase with my smile debit card, for £10.00, the transaction was of course accepted and on my way I went. Then on the 2nd Jan Smile charged me the monthly fee of £13.00 for my smile more account, again which is fine. On the 3rd Dec, the £10.00 from the first transaction shows up, Smile informed me they had paid this despite me not having enough funds to pay for this transaction, and puts me £9.08 over my OD limit. I then paid in £35 at around midday on the 3rd Jan(The same day as the payment was listed as being taken) to bring my account back into limit with a little to spare. I have also transferred another £25 today so my account is now well within the limit. Smile are now saying that I am going to be charged £20.00 for the indiscretion, but i fail to see how they can do this, it is unfair in my view as the first transaction in my view was 'paid' at the point of purchase, I base this on the fact it was accepted at POS by the bank, and the last physical payment was actually to themselves for the subscription charge. I of course accept this may not be correct but that's how I feel about it just now. More importantly though, the account was back in limit the very same day before their close of business and therefore I fail to see how they can apply any charge as they have not actually lost anything, nor have they been caused any additional work that actually costs them £20.00. I see this charge as excessive and is more a penalty charge than a charge to recover any loss suffered by Smile. I believe this is rather unfair and would like CAG members to throw me some opinions and thoughts on what they think and how to go about dealing with this. Thanks in advance ... mrbrooks

Hi everyone, just a quick update here... After starting a formal complaints procedure with the Mortgage Co. they responded, basically saying that the £250.00 quote was incorrect and the correct quote was indeed £160.00, they also apologised for not letting the lady in question know why there had been a potential increase or when this had occurred. They finalised the complaint with the offer to return the £160.00 discharge fee as a goodwill gesture and apology for any confusion and worry! So all in all, a very good result and very fair and reasonable response from the mortgage company, NRAM. Thanks all... mrbrooks

Thanks Brigadier, not great news, but I suppose sometimes we just have to accept such things! I am a little concerned though at the fact they don't inform the customer or feel they need to explain or provide the breakdown of charges. Thanks again old bean, your input is very much appreciated. I look forward to more comments from the CAG crew! mrbrooks

Hi all, not sure this is the right place. (site team - please move to appropriate place if you feel it is better suited!) Anyway. a friend of mine has a 15 year mortgage with NRAM. She has only 15 months left, owing in the region of £4385.00. She recently had a small windfall and decided to pay off the mortgage. She has no early payment penalties to pay so figured this was a smart move. So she calls NRAM, explains she is in a position to pay off the outstanding balance and wanted confirmation of the numbers, and then they told her there was £250 discharge fee to pay! So she told them she would get back to them! We checked the paper work (originally the mortgage was with Northern Rock, taken out in mid 2000) and it says the discharge fee is £250, ok thats fine, if a little excessive. However, from around 2006/7 her yearly statements show the discharge fee being £160, which is what she thought it was before she called them. The latest statement, from Dec 2012 (Yearly Statements) shows the discharge fee also being £160. So when she called again and questioned them about the charge rising to £250 when the statements for the last 7 years show £160, the replied with 'we have increased it due to costs', she asked for a breakdown explaining said costs, they have refused. She also asked why she was not informed about the changes or why they are not explained, they said, 'we dont inform people of these changes until the statement time' and 'we don't explain the charges generally'. She was originally willing to pay the £160 but now feels they are being greedy and read that many folks feel £50 is enough (I do not know if this is true of course and much of what I read was from 2007/08 ish). They also said she may be able to get the charge reduced, but she would have to make a formal complaint about the charges first, so she did this while on the phone and is now awaiting a letter. So the upshot is, after reading about these charges a little, and seeing that many people feel these numbers are excessive and unfair, and also feeling they are not playing fair, I wanted to get some idea from CAG members about their opinions on the best way to go with this and what the current lay of the land is in regards to these fees in terms of what is considered fair and reasonable and how to approach it. Any input as ever is very much appreciated... Thanks mrbrooks

Hi all I apologise for the huge delay here... Anyway, she did owe the payment! She offered to pay it. DL responded by waiving the outstanding balance, and with an apology and another £25 'cashback' to her account and a full written apology for the way their letters were difficult to understand and had not pointed out clearly what was going and also for the way the Moorcroft Agent had behaved. So all in all not a bad result, very kind of DL in the end. I think we can mark this down to a slight win! And another example of a big company putting their arse before their elbow and not making sure that all the paperwork was present and correct. And of course also another shining example of what badly behaved lot some of the Debt Collectors can be... Thanks ALL mrbrooks

Hi Surfer01, I absolutely agree, it was a disgraceful move by the Moorcroft agent, and his general attitude was equally offensive. Having spoken to my mom, she is going to call the DL customer rep that called her on Thurs and inform her of this latest contact from Moorcroft and tell her that she intends to make a formal complaint over the matter and will refer DL to the appropriate bodies for their lacking and oversights and for the behaviour of their chosen agents, Moorcroft. Will let you all know what happens when I get more info!!! mrbrooks

Hi all, update here!!! Ok so I sent another letter in on my moms behalf, basically saying DL have broken all kinds of OFT guidelines and their behaviour has surely broken a few laws and added to this, now she is being harassed by Moorcroft for something they (DL) should have resolved weeks ago. I put the words 'FORMAL COMPLAINT' in big bold letters at the top leaving no room for misinterpretations. That letter was sent on the 16th Of September by Signed For 1st Class (just like the previous 2 letters), they received it on the 18th of September (I again downloaded the page from the Post Office showing the confirmed Delivery/Signature). On Thurs 19th September, sometime in the morning, DL Customer Services call my mom, they say, we are very sorry to hear of your troubles and we take complaints very seriously. So it turns out she had owed them 1 payment and she reminded them that she was happy to pay up had they simply provided the explanation she required. The Customer Service Rep, said she had not been able to track down the previous 2 letters and knew nothing about them, my mom pointed out that we had the proof they were delivered to their Leeds office and signed for. Anyway the Rep basically agreed that they had gone about things in a way that could definitely been improved upon. She offered to waive the outstanding balance and also offered her £50 as compensation for how things have gone. So my mom was very happy with this result and again thanked the rep who told her that she would send out the confirmation of the resolution in writing and would make the compensatory payment in the next few days. So 21st September my mom get the letter, informing her that DL have agreed to waive the outstanding balance as a good will gesture and offered her the £50 as compensation for their oversights in the matter. Again my mom was very pleased with the outcome and the speedy response from DL Customer Services Team. So move to today, we are at my brothers place having lunch, with my mom n dad, aunties, uncles, cousins, and she gets a call, from a Moorcroft agent. He asks her for information regarding the matter so he can confirm who he is talking to, she tells him she is giving him nothing and if he is who who claims he knows all about the situation and doesn't require further information from her. She then informs him that the matter is dealt with and she is not discussing the matter with him and she finds his calling on a Sunday lunch in rather poor taste and unprofessional. He tells her, he can call her whenever he chooses too and as far he is concerned the debt is still valid and the recovery is still in force and then he asks her again how she is going to deal with the matter. Again she tells him the matter is resolved directly with DL, and he basically says that he doesn't believe her and that if it were true DL would have informed Moorcroft and again asks how she is going to deal with the matter and if she is going to pay up now. Again she tells him the matter is dealt with and she is not going to discuss the matter any further with him, he then tells her that if she refuses to speak with him she could make things worse for herself!!! By this time she if of course rather stressed, embarrassed and upset, so he then proceeds to tell her, that she needs to contact DL and inform them, that they need to inform him of such and tells he will give her a week to contact them or he will be contacting her again and that there may be increased costs due to his additional time...I told her to ask for his name, and would only give his first name, refusing to provide his surname, telling her he didn't have to give his surname. So then she tells him that she is not talking to him any further and ends the call. OK now, as far as I am concerned this is clearly harassment, the agent was aggressive, bordering rude, arrogant and in my opinion clearly misled her and this has clearly broken a number of OFT guidelines. Firstly, in the previous 2 letter, we clearly stated that any and all correspondence was to be done in letter/written form only, so calling her was out of order here. The claim that they have not 'seen' the previous letters, is of no concern to us, we can prove the letters arrived at their premises, what happened to them after this is their own issue and if they have internal mail issues then I am going to suggest they investigate where this mail has been going to. I also believe the agent should have responded more along the lines of, I will get back to DL and check out what you have told me and if I need to I will contact you at a later date, it is NOT her place to have to contact DL in order to make sure the correct data/information is held by Moorcroft, it is their own responsibility. His response and his whole attitude in general was inappropriate and in my opinion can be easily classed as a number of breaches, including, improper/unfair business practice, deceptive and misleading statements, bordering on threatening, psychological harassment, in addition to this DL have failed to inform Moorcroft of the change of status of this case and have breached a few more rules themselves to add to the ones I had already pointed to them with regards to the previous requests for information etc. I believe now we should report both DL and Moorcroft for this string of failings and plan to lodge another formal complaint into the latest issue with Moorcroft and the incorrect information/data and the attitude of the Moorcroft agent in general. If anyone has anything else to add please throw it in, I am keen to hear from anyone with something to throw into the pot, ideas, advice or just general comments... Good Luck all... mrbrooks

Hi Surfer01, I just wanted to mention something with regards this, and I do not know if her own policy had such a cancellation clause, however, the policy was due to expire in July, so she didn't cancel it, she just chose not to take out a new policy, I am sure under the law these are different things, otherwise all and sundry would be charging us for not taking out a new policy. Also. the letter she received in July clearly stated that if she was happy to let the policy expire without continuing with a new policy then she was to simply do nothing, which is what she did. This again I do not quite understand, she has done what their own letter stated, and also I have questioned, why this letter, did not infact mention that if she bailed out now, she would be liable for an additional payment. Anyway, thanks again...and thanks to all members for the input here...most appreciated... mrbrooks

Hi unclebulgaria67, thanks for the reply. I find the whole thing rather distasteful, she shouldn't be getting letters from 'debt collectors' directly or otherwise, as you so rightly pointed out, this is easily resolved, and more to the point, it was easily avoidable. What I don't understand, is why to this point, they have provided no evidence or explanation to support the claim. I assume at some point, as the legal burden of proof falls upon them to show she owes this outstanding payment, they are going to have to give details as to where, when and how this alleged payment has become outstanding. Which is why I do not understand why they have not done so already. None of their letters explain this claim or why they feel they are entitled to it, and I am sure they have shot themselves in the foot now with regards to how they have gone about the whole affair, irrelevant of whether she owes the amount or not. For example, she has made a reasonable dispute of the claim pending further evidence, she has made it perfectly clear that she is willing to make payment if they can provide this proof, this has been ignored on 2 occasions now, we clearly marked the 2nd letter as the claim being in dispute as far as she was concerned, which as far as I am aware places them in the position of validating said debt before passing to any other collection agency, which again would mean they would have to provide details to support the claim, and again, which raises the question as to why they have not already done this... My next step will be to send out a letter basically saying 'FORMAL COMPLAINT' demanding to know why they have failed to produce any explanation or evidence to backup their alleged claim and refer them to the previous 2 letters we have sent. I feel it is unfair to have moved this to debt collection so rapidly without answering her queries for further evidence and explanation. I am sure they have broken the law here somewhere or at least broken a few important guidelines. Anyway thanks again to everyone and will update when I have more... bye for now...

Hi all thanks for the replies I agree with pretty much all of it. For clarity here is my moms position - She is happy to pay the amount IF they can explain to her how it is that she owes the amount in question in the first place. The problem being they have thus far failed to provide any explanation and now there is more!!! See below... OK so today my mom got this > [ATTACH]46288[/ATTACH] from Moorcroft Debt Recovery Now we sent a 2nd letter in to DL and this was received and signed for on the 4th Sept, this letter from Moorcroft was issued on the 6th Sept, now considering that they have had the first letter on the 16th August, requesting information, explanation and evidence of where and when this debt was alledgely accrued, and the latest letter on the 4th referring them to that original letter, they seem to have, utterly ignored the request for this information, have made no attempt to explain it, shed any light on it or provide an ounce of evidence to support their claim. In this time they have made 2 demands and now this letter from Moorcroft. Again, as I stated here, we told DL that she was happy to make the payment upon provision of supporting explanation evidence, for example, as surfer01 mentions, she could inadvertantly owe an outstanding payment due to some policy cancellation rule, this is fine, they just need to explain this and show/refer her the policy details where this clause exists. I find it rather noxious that they have ignored her requests for information and confirmation and have now referred it to a debt collection agency without responding to her request for information. So my questions are: 1 for the general CAG public here: what do you reckon the next step here is? I have read some of the stuff from the OFT and I have no doubt the 'dispute' she has made is reasonable and well grounded, she is not refusing to pay, but rather asking they prove she owes this sum before she does by way of making clear where the outstanding balance has arisen. They have gone way way past the 5 days the OFT mention as reasonable time to respond to such a dispute/request for information and have move directly onto refering the matter to a Debt Recovery Company, which brings with it the issue of potential additional charges etc, and the point being this could have and should have been avoided, by providing the infromation requested. Thus I beleive we could and should dispute ANY charges levied against this account for this sole reason, ie, they have missed out the previous step and never needed to proceed to this step as she is not a 'refusing to pay' or 'wont pay' but a give me the evidence before I pay' and has made this clear on more than one occasion. So any thoughts on this most welcome. 2 For site team! Would this thread be better off in a debt recovery thread? Im not saying it would, im just askin the question. Anyone who has a more indepth knowledge regarding OFT guidelines on Debt recovery and how to tackle this are most welcome to throw in some suggestions and thoughts, I very much appreciate everyones efforts and voice here. thanks all mrbrooks

Hi raydetinu, thanks for the reply, apologies for not getting back sooner but have been laid up. Anyway, my mom says shes checked and she has 12 payments, going from July 2012 through to June 2013. I have sent them a letter basically saying, they have had way more time to respond to this than the 5 days the OFT considers as being in a 'timely manner'. Pointing out that in this time not only have they failed to produce ANY supporting evidence of their claim, they have infact managed to send out another demand, thus ignoring the fact we have contacted them with regards to this matter on two occasions now. I know for a fact the original letter was delivered to their offices on the 16th August and it is now the 5th September, giving them some 3 weeks to respond properly. I have also told them that from this point forward, if they are unable or unwilling to produce their evidence in order to validate this claim, then any further correspondence, not containing said evidence (ie further demands and threatograms) will be viewed as harrasment and a formal complaint will be lodged with their company and they will be reported to the appropiate bodies for said abuse. We shall see what happens next. mrbrooks

Hi all, a quick update and request for some advice here! Ok we sent a letter out on the 14th August 2013, by 1st Class, signed for delivery, it arrived on the 16th, I have the receipt and a print out from the PO web site showing the letter was delivered to the Leeds office of Direct Line on the 16th and I even called the PO and spoke to some nice girl who confirmed that as far as they were concerned the letter had been delivered. So we can safely assume that for all intents and purposes that the letter in question has in fact arrived at its destination. The letter in question is here > [ATTACH=CONFIG]46134[/ATTACH] Next we receive a letter again asking for the payment, no mention of our own letter, and here it is > [ATTACH=CONFIG]46135[/ATTACH] So, the point of this post? Well, what do we do? I figured asking for some form of validation, proof, whatever you may wish to call it, was fairly reasonable and prudent and would be forthcoming without too much resistance from DL. After all if you could just claim someone owed you some money without needing to provide evidence of such, then we would all be at it! So I have written a response to this last letter, which basically says, Direct Line claims that we have not responded to the previous letter, which is wholly inaccurate and untrue, as we responded on the 14th etc and that I have proof of posting and proof of delivery/receipt at your Leeds premises...And I refer them to that letter rather than re-write a lot of spiel. I tried to find some info on 'debt validation' but its mostly confusing as the majority of it seems to be American with very little mention about how to go about it in the UK. However I find it hard to accept that there is no official path/protocol for someone to make a valid request for proof of debt owed to a business. I have a quick scout about in the OFT guidance for business engaged in the recovery of consumer credit debts, but again Im not really sure if this applies here or not. Some of the points I highlighted include: section 2.2 - Fair Business Practice 'be transparent' I fail to see how not providing proof of the debt is being transparent exercise forbearance and consideration I fail to see how making a 7 day demand, sending the letter by 2nd Class, leaving 3 days to make a payment is 'reasonable time and opportunity to repay debts' Section 3 - Unfair or Improper Business Practices Data Accuracy It states in this section, amongst other things, '...with a view to only the actual debtor and valid debts being pursued for repayment' . OK so how does one 'validate' the debt? If this debt is not valid, then it follows the accuracy of the data must be in question. Communication - Section 3.3b States - ' leaving out or presenting information in such a way that it creates, or has the potential to create, a false or misleading impression, or exploits a debtors lack of knowledge' . OK so leaving out the requested proof of the debt and not mentioning it is clearly leaving out information, that could mislead us into believing the only option open to us is to give in and pay. Physical/Psychological Harassment - Section 3.7 subsection e - When seeking to recover debt, failing to take appropriate steps with a view to ensuring that available data/information to inform the the pursuit and recovery of a debt is accurate and adequate, such that the debtor and th amount of the debt can be correctly identified from that data/information Ok so again this section mentions Failure to do so may result in - a person being pursued for a debt that does not exist. Which brings us back to the request for evidence and validation of said debt. Deceptive and/or unfair methods - Section 3.9 (i) When a debt is reasonably queried or disputed, failing to investigate and/or provide details (possibly including for example, details of account history, payment schedules and relevant correspondence) to the debtor, as appropriate, in a timely manner' This one, sings to me ... and again the sub notes suggest that this action or lack of it may possibly result in - 'a person being pursued for a debt that does not exist' There are more but I figure this post is long enough and you all get the idea!!! So any more input, ideas and thoughts would be most welcome... mrbrooks

Hi Citizenb, it is confusing, I cant figure out whether they take payment in advance (which is what i believe should be happening) or whether they are claiming it in arrears (which i would find rather odd for an insurance company). I am also wondering about this final notice, what (apologies I cant remember now) are the procedures for issuing FN, i mean surely they cant go from, thanks for you custom, to here is a final notice within 3 weeks! thanks mrbrooks

Hi CitizenB thanks for the input, if the case is that the last payment would be for July, then how is it that the new policy also starts in July and not in August? Is the July payment for the last of the old policy or the start of the new policy? Are we saying that the monthly payments are taken in 'arrears'? And not in advance? mrbrooks

Hi everyone, just thought I would drop this in for a bit of input and advice... My mom had a policy with DL to cover her cat for the last 2-3 years. She cancelled the policy in June 2013, the last payment she made was on the 10th Of June 2013, I have confirmed this from her bank statements. Her policy documents state that the 'new' policy would (if she were to continue) would commence from 18/07/2013. You can view the policy schedules below: 2012/13 Policy - [ATTACH=CONFIG]45752[/ATTACH] 2013/14 Policy - [ATTACH=CONFIG]45751[/ATTACH] After cancelling her direct debit with the bank she received this letter sent out on the 15th June 2013, [ATTACH=CONFIG]45753[/ATTACH], which seems straight forward enough and she assumed that as the payment for June had gone out, this would take her to the cutoff/end date of the 17th July 2013 as mentioned in the letter and she just put it aside knowing she was not renewing. Then today, she received this letter [ATTACH=CONFIG]45754[/ATTACH], a FINAL NOTICE asking for the payment of £17.34 and the usual threatogram spiel mentioning debt management companies and agents etc etc, which as of course got her in a panic. She has received no interim letters between the two shown above. So my question is this, what the hell are they playing at? haha, really, what I want to know is, has anyone got any input on how to get this resolved, she spoke to them and they were less than helpful, the woman was only interested in discussing the payment options and threatening her. So I said, tell them you are not discussing it on the telephone any more, and that you will write to them, and got her to end the conversation. I know from past experience that companies like to play the heavy handed approach in the hope that customers will cave in, but I don't at this point see that she owes them any funds and told her not to pay them until they can clearly show where/what this payment is meant to cover. I plan to write in and ask for clarification regarding the policy and period this payment is supposed to have covered, and why in their initial letter they make no mention of any potential outstanding payments due on the policy. My real concern though is this, FINAL NOTICE, how can they just issue a FINAL NOTICE when no other notices have been issued? and this is like 18 days after they sent their first letter, even IF she owed this payment, which I am not convinced about, surely 18 days to issue a FINAL NOTICE is a little cheeky as the payment would have only gone on the 8-10th July anyway, so its not even 30 days past when it should have been paid 'in their eyes', i.e. when this letter was sent, she would have even been less than 30 days in so called arrears and yet already they've issued a FINAL NOTICE to her. (I hope that makes sense!) It seems a little over the top IMHO and a bit heavy handed for £17.34 and I plan to get to the bottom of it! So any input and advice on how to approach this would be most useful and grateful... Thanks all...

Hi CitizenB, indeed, and again thanks to yourself and all those who helped me get here... mrbrooks

Hi DX, yeah they did I suppose, but I prefer to think on it as, the account was worth 4.5K they have shelled out in the region of just over £10k to her, plus add to this the cost of all the man hours from regular office bods, legal people etc, add to this, the involvement of the FOS, various debt recovery people and Uncle Bryan, plus the court costs...it must amount to more than they had actually bargained for. I also consider the fact they had no chance to palm it off and claim insurance for it a good result, because I honestly believe that this was their plan, just to write it off, sell it off cheap and claim, they did no however take into consideration that we would argue with them at every step and would have our own support and advice from Caggers like yourself and Andy, Ken, Seriously Fed up and a plethora of others who gave me the tools to fight the sods off...this in the end has still cost them more than they had bargained for. Plus my mum decided that meeting them halfway was finally better than actually having to go to court, she is 63 and did not really fancy trawling off to Northampton court, nor wasting a days wages for me and paying the fuel costs there and back, and when we consider the fact that prior to this they were attempting to tell us she had no case, I feel though it was only half a U-Turn for them, it was nonetheless a U-Turn...They of course did only do this U-Turn when they realised we were actually going to court after all... To be honest too, I have plenty of my own work to do and really decided it was probably time to draw a conclusion to it, just for the sake of £350 and considering the other £10K they have shelled out...it seemed afairly reasonable place to put the gauntlet down and draw a line under it... -EDIT- I also consider myself lucky enough to have been able to spend the time fighting this for her, I work from home mostly so am able to dip in and out when the need took me, and I am also lucky enough to have been able to spend enough time on CAG to get some background information on the way to go and the legalities. I know some of my friends in similar positions and they either just dont have the inclination to spend the time after being at work or in between the kids or they just don't believe its possible to beat these nasty Goliath companies...someone even accused me of making things worse for other customers because now CapOne will take the money they lost from other customers, I of course told them it was their look out to fight their own corner if they felt it was required and that I and CAG would show them the way if they needed to go down that path... mrbrooks

Hi everyone, the final chapter is now closed... A brief run down of the last leg... 8th March - CapOne solicitors sent my mum an offer for the 'unlawful charges' dating back to 2007, without any compound interest... 9th March my mum agrees to accept the offer and I got the paperwork signed and sent off, via email and letter to the solicitor and called the court to confirm the case was halted and we had made an agreement and called the solicitor to confirm she had received the documents 10th March CapOne solicitor sends us a Tomlin Order to sign and I get it signed and emailed back to them. She calls me to tell me she is presenting the signed Tomlin Order to the court. 15th March we receive a notification from the court with regards to the case no longer being pursued and that they are aware of the 'agreement', the closing date for presenting our case was for the 2nd April but this of course no longer applies. 10th April we receive a notification from the court that district judge Lloyd-Jones has agreed and stamped the Tomlin Order on the 2nd April. 29th April I contact CapOne solicitor to find out what is going on as we have hear nothing from them at all. The solicitor gives me some attitude about 'if you have issue with how the court deals with such matters then I suggest you talk to them', I of course give her a barrage of words back about how its odd that Ive had the notice since the 10th and it was signed on the 2nd yet you are still unaware of the document blah blah...It reminds me of the time you claimed there was no court case and I had to get the FOS legal team involved to directly confirm where you were on the matter...sounds like you need to open your post a bit sooner...blah blah...she promptly shut up... I told her that I would call on the 7th of may for confirmation that the cheque (which was supposed to be issued within 28 days of the Tomlin Order arriving) had been issued, and if it had not or she could not confirm this, I would contact the court directly to inform them of the breach by CapOne... 7th May Cheque for £355.53 arrives...I email the solicitor and thank her for her time and effort and that I am glad I can finally draw a line under this nonsense... So, all in all a splendid result, a lot of work and a lot of nonsense thrown at us by CapOne and sometimes I did wonder what the heck I had done, but with the help of the dedicated CAG members and bit of self belief I managed to win through and got a very decisive victory and got my mom her PPI and charges back... CAG = Awesome bye for now everyone and I wish everyone the best of luck...

Hi all, I have a little issue that's brewing here and would very much like some input... Smile, have apparently rescinded my OD, looks like it happened yesterday (03/04/13) without informing me, on top of this I now have 2 messages in the secure messaging area telling me they are going to charge me for 2 transactions that went through after the OD was removed (04/04/13). I have only figured this out by tracking back my transaction and adding it all up and have also noticed that my OD limit now says £0.00 My OD is part of the Smile More account and is supposed to come with £260.00 OD as standard and up to 2 days ago I was£40-£50 under the £260 so I know I didn't go over the agreed £260.00 and the transactions they are charging me for would have easily gone through as they were for £3.72 and £3.99. On top of this I have gotten a missed call from what looks like their collections Dept... (I checked the missed number on-line and others reported it has co-operative debt management team) Now I know (from what others say) they can remove the OD at any time but I feel its a bit off to just to remove it without warning, and then charge me for bouncing transactions and on top of that call me a day later from debt collections. Any input and advice is most appreciated... mrbrooks

Hellooooo all, long time no post...I hope everyone is well and ticking along OK... I have with me, the final chapter in this long trek with Cap One and all the CAG Members who've guided me on this unholy trek into the world of credit demons and devils...and back out again... Well, the last 28 days (which I took as part of the allocation questionnaire option, to give us and Cap One some time to consider our positions and come to some agreement)...Well nothing happened for the first 3 weeks, I sent emails and left messages with the legal person dealing with the case at their end and got nothing... Then about 10 days ago a response, and since then I have been spent time between telephone and email with Cap Ones legal representative (in house) attempting to convince me that there was no way a court would ever side with me on the counter-claim regarding the 'unlawful charges'...In other words it is in your interest to drop the case... She has attempted to convince me that the court would see it as fair and just and that their charges are under the average and under what it actually costs them to cover their 'liquidated' costs, which of course I nearly peed myself laughing at... Because lets be honest here, does anyone here or anywhere on the planet, honestly believe that if they could charge more, they wouldn't? just because they see the £12 as a fair charge? No they would have passed the full and total cost onto the customer without hesitation...and argued this fact at court...and would have no issue providing the proof that it costs them more than the charge they issue against the customer...which of course we all know it doesn't, and all know this is the real reason they don't provide proof of their real costs... Anyway, I digress, the long and short of it is this, a few days ago I got this from the court: [ATTACH=CONFIG]42287[/ATTACH] The case has been allocated, this was in my opinion good news because I honestly believe Cap One thought I was going to back-down and just forget how they have behaved...and I figured, well I may as well go right up to the wire, just to see how they dealt with it when they realised I wasn't going to back down, not at this stage at least... So then the legal rep for Cap One calls me, telling she has sent me a letter out, responding to my last email. Which was some 4 weeks+ prior to the letter...So I say OK I look forward to reading it...(she sent it out on Friday last week, it arrived Thursday this week). Here it is: [ATTACH=CONFIG]42288[/ATTACH]... Ok there are a few things I would like to say about this, firstly, you see, she is STILL claiming that the case would almost likley fail and the court would reject the the claim and uphold Cap Ones position, this is based on her statement re charges: So she is again telling us all that it actually costs them more than the arbitrary £12 charges for late payment and over-limit... Anyway the other point I would like to address before I continue and conclude my epic post, is this: So, though they are convinced my claim has no ground nor mileage and the court will simply reject my argument, and though according to the legal rep there is not a hope in hell I will win and I am just wasting the courts time; even though the district judge and has seen fit to allocate and hear the case and not just strike it out as a time wasting exercise. In addition to this, Cap One according to her (in her own words above) are being fair and reasonable and giving their customers the chance to pay only £12 default charges when it costs Cap One more than this on a regular basis, and though they claim there is no case to answer... Yes, despite all of this, she has still made the offer, obviously purely out of the goodness of her heart and the just manner in which Cap One operate, to refund the charges to the tune of £355.52, on a without admission of liability basis of course, which is about half my £700.00 claim value (no CI of course but I don't really care any more at this stage), So considering the huffing, the puffing and backhanded crapola tactics they have tried on me this last 14 months,I feel this offer is a right result... and I am actually really very happy that finally this whole thing is almost concluded, its been a long slog and sometimes I have doubted my ability and staying power, but hey I'm here, just about to cross the line and I am proper happy... One last question here though, and I hope this is my last for this thread and this epic posting, I have the NOD and I am confused as to what I should put in the part that says: (enter name of judge) granted permission for the claimant discontinue (all)(part) of this (claim)(counterclaim) by order dated........ I am going to call the court on Monday and tell them about the offer that I plan to accept it and would like to issue the NOD... Thanks again everyone and I will pop back to check answers and then I will let you all know when the cheque appears and we can pin this thread to the wall as done and dusted... MR B

Thanks andy that's great news buddy, again I have to say a big thanks to yourself, CitizenB, Mike Hawk, Ken100464 and the many other good folks around here who have pushed me to succeed in this case, without all your efforts and guidance I would have been lost and most likely drowned under a sea of cr@p thrown at me by all these CapOne puppets... Thanks again, I will have a little think about this and let you all know what I decide in the very near future or if I have any more Qs ill post up... Mr Brooks --EDIT-- Ive just had a look at the PART 38 - DISCONTINUANCE stuff on the MOJ, seems fairly straight forward, famous last words...