In regards to all information that has been provided about unfair charges, is incorrect, i received the following from FOS: Please be advised that we cannot deal with complaints about the firm‘s legitimate use of its commercial judgment, also the business cannot be challenged on the grounds that their charges are too high. As you may be aware, the Office of Fair Trading brought an important legal "test case" to establish if it could assess whether the amounts the firms were charging were fair. As part of this legal "test case", the Court was also asked to consider whether these types of charges amounted to "penalties". The Court ruled that the fairness of unauthorised charges could not be challenged on the basis proposed by the Office of Fair Trading. The ombudsman has to take the law into account when we decide cases. This is why the Supreme Court's ruling is very important in our work on bank charges. So we have considered the Supreme Court's decision – and its implications – very carefully. Our view is that the legal ruling means we will not generally be able to help with cases that involve complaints about unauthorised/unfair charges.

letter sent, thanks dx

Ye they failed the SAR, informed them that they have to send me a hard copy and they ignored me and did not respond. Also I informed them that when they call me with a recorded message that does not perform checks to confirm who I am it is a breach of data protection, but they think that because I confirmed my phone number when I got the loan that they do not need to carry out any checks.

Also the link does not go to a spreadsheet, just links to a post saying own thread created.

Dont have the statements. Sent SAR the told me to check the website and did not send me anything, checked website nothing listed.

Also thanks for creating a separate thread dx

Ok so the £564 interset is still valid therefore i would have to pay £964, surely since i this interest to date, and i have been contesting this for several months with them then the interest for that period can be claimed back as well?

Hi guys, Am still dealing with the complaint with Microcredit LTD, as they have been informed by the FOS that they have 8 weeks to resolve this. This is the email i got off them upto now. "We have received the following information previously from the Financial Ombudsman Service: The application of interest and charges by a lender is a commercial decision for a business to make, and it is not for the Financial Ombudsman Service to comment on whether or not the charges are unfair. In investigating disputes of this nature, we must look toward the terms and conditions of the specific agreement to decide whether or not the interest and charges have been applied in line with them. When an individual encounters financial difficulties, there is no obligation on any lender to make amendments to the terms and conditions of the agreement- such as reducing interest or charges. However we would expect a lender to take a positive approach to the circumstances such as providing the possibility to enter into a repayment plan. As I already explained in my previous e-mail where you may find the charges and interest in the loan agreement. The Hardship application has been available on your MiniCredit.co.uk online account from the 26th of October 2012 when the reply was sent out from us to your postal letter. The OFT’s Debt Collection Guidance states that the creditor should consider suspending continuous payment authority when appropriate. We have provided you with the possibility to not pay for the failed debit attempt fees that have been and will be added to the outstanding balance once we receive your hardship form. Exercising the continuous payment authority is not a choice but an obligation we have to follow according to the Loan Agreement. You have already been advised how to cancel the continuous payment authority with the bank. The recorded voicemail messages our system sends out to your registered mobile phone number are in accordance with the Data Protection Act as the number was verified during the registration. Providing access to your mobile phone to a third party is a choice of your own. The default balance £1789 calculated from the date of issuing the 11th of August 2012 to the default date the 29th of December 2012 consists of the following: Loan principal £400 Interest in total £564 (1% of the Principal per day) Overdue penalty £25 (was added on the 1st day overdue) Overdue penalty £55 (was added on the 3rd day overdue) Debit Attempt fees in total £645 (every unsuccessful attempt to receive the repayment costs up to £5) Debt Recovery fee £100 (was added on the 30th day overdue)" The statement of the FOS not having any involvement in unfair charges I think is incorrect and made up by microcredit. Is this correct? Cheers Skelly

Hi Anya, They told me that they make 3 attempts per day to debit account, each time this fails they charge £5, they also charge £4 per day for interest. Both charges are illegal, report them to the FOS who will fill a complaint. Dont worry about the door step collection agent, as they dont actually send anyone, if they did they would be in breach of there law as they do not have right to canvass of premises. Don't pay anything else to them. Andy

I've all ways thought this advice was incorrect

If there is no law on this, then the advice should not be given out. They can easily issue a default on the credit file, which is bad enough, all because of poor advice.

This is the point I was making, as i have not found any law that says they cant charge the extra interest. It seems to me that the advice is incorrect and I've spotted it loads of times, users who are in need of help get advised that they can only charge 1 months interest when this does not seem to be correct, they then tell the loan company to get stuffed for the rest and then keep getting charges and interest because they have not cleared the rest, a default could be filled against them and they get a bad credit score and also a very high debt all because they followed the advice on several forums that they only need to pay the loan amount plus 1 month interest.

Now this is what i think is the case, and what the loan companies think is the case. What it dont explain is why people looking for advice get told to only pay "amount borrowed plus one month's interest"?

Also on page 25 of OFT1107, it says: The principal consequences for the borrower of not keeping up with repayments In our view, the risk of the following should be explained to the borrower, where applicable: The total cost of the debt growing incurring default charges and interest where applicable These both sugest that that they can apply these charges.

Thanks for your response. So prior to the new charter, they could apply interest for longer periods? Therefore why is everyone giving the wrong information? these are legal matters that can see people getting in seriose debt because they believe they are within the law when they are evidently not.