This topic was closed on 10 March 2019. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

This topic was closed on 09 March 2019. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

This topic was closed on 09 March 2019. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

This topic was closed on 03/07/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

This topic was closed on 03/07/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

This topic was closed on 03/07/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

This topic was closed on 03/07/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

This topic was closed on 03/07/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

Just seen this on the FSA website - 'Section 150 rights Under Section 150 of FSMA, private persons who have suffered loss as a result of a firm’s contravention of an FSA rule have the right to take action in the courts for damages. These rights do not attach to breaches of the Principles but are available with respect to breaches of almost all FSA conduct of business rules. So, in line with this approach, we propose that such rights should apply for BCOBS rules.' So surely Principle 6 (a firm must pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly) would not be actionable at court given the statement above?

So what is he getting when he says '...the combined effect of PRIN 3.4.4 R and s.150 FSMA 2000 is to deprive consumers of a right of action under this provision'? PRIN 3.4.4 R states - A contravention of the rules in PRIN does not give rise to a right of action by a private person under section 150 of the Act (and each of those rules is specified under section 150(2) of the Act as a provision giving rise to no such right of action).

Can someone clarify whether it is in fact definately possible to sue a bank under BCOB. Only a friend put this question to a barrister the other day and got this response back: 'As to a proposed claim in the County Courts: this is probably unattractive and unviable for a number of reasons, but I would just point out .... that the Principles of Business are not actionable by consumers. You refer to Principle 6, but the combined effect of PRIN 3.4.4 R and s.150 FSMA 2000 is to deprive consumers of a right of action under this provision.' Am now thoroughly confused!

It's to sue my bank actually. It may well involve FOS too and bringing a Judicial Review...

I haven't asked them directly as yet no, as I'd wanted to check what the policy actually states first. Unfortunately I've lost this and so have to await a copy before I can check the policy wording. If anyone meantime does have any experience, with Axa or any other insurer, I'd be interested to hear.

General question - am I bound to have to use my insurance company's panel of solicitors or can I choose my own from the outset?

You may be surprised to learn that we are only talking of Natwest here! It's regarding a complaint I have with the FOS over a default that was wrongly issued on my credit card. I had claimed they had breached a part of the Lending Code but in her reasons for rejection, she fails to assess whether they breached it at all, dismissing my arguments by saying '"In any case, the FOS is not the regulator of the CCA - the OFT is." 1) she appears to be suggesting that FOS cannot deal with a complaint of any breach made of, or under, the CCA - despite the fact that I was anyway alleging a breach of the Lending Code and 2) We all know that the OFT do not investigate individual consumer complaints so correct me if I'm wrong, even if I was bringing any type of complaint concerning a breach of the CCA, FOS do have both the remit and jurisdiction to hear it - yes?

According to a rejected ruling on a complaint I have just received from FOS, the adjudicator has dismissed my evidence that a bank has breached the CCA saying that FOS is not the regulator of the CCA, that the OFT is. I understand that, but FOS still has a duty to consider where there has been a breach under the CCA surely - since the OFT don't take on individual consumers complaints, FOS are the only ones who can! Any comments on this?

We used a loss assessor to handle a household insurance claim for us. The fees agreed at the start were 10% of the eventual payout + expenses, which I believe to be fairly standard. However, having just sent us a statement, he's not only charged us the 10% & expenses, but 17.5% VAT on top. Is this correct? That effectively makes it a 27.5% fee - not the 10% I was expecting them to take!

We have supplied Santander with an income/expenditure list, list of creditors, amounts of debt etc etc as supplied by Consumer Credit Counselling Service (CCCS). However, now Santander are insisting we additionally send them bank statements as well. I always understood that statements from CCCS were deemed fully sufficient evidence and they should not require, nor be asking, for anything further. Can anyone who's dealt with Santander, or know in principle, confirm this?

Have any Lloyds TSB PPI claimants been sent credit card statements more than 6 years old? Or if you already had statements over 6 years, has anyone been refunded for over 6 years of PPI?

Just to add to everyones grievances against Paragon, we're in the same boat - in hardship and behind on monthly payments. They continue to add penalty charges for sending letters, calls etc As far as our hardship goes, they have totally ignored our plight, refused to allow us reduced payments and now they're just about to launch legal proceedings for arrears. We have lodged complaints with, and been updating every month or so, both the supervision Dept of the FSA and the secured Lending unit of the OFT. Although they cannot tell you what action, if any, they may take, if enough complaints reach them from the public, hopefully something will be done about these leeches. My advice to anyone in the same position with constant charges, hardship, etc with Paragon is to send strongly-worded complaints to both the above. Enclose any and all relevent paperwork including letters, statements of accounts, letters adding charges etc etc

Hi, We have a credit card debt with Santander, and whilst in hardship for around the last 6 months or so have been duly paying them a token £10 per month. Despite having originally sent them an income & expenditure/budget list, a list of creditors etc as produced for us by the CCCS, they recently started hounding us through their Viking Collections for the whole debt, and wanting our normal contractual monthly payments. We wrote to complain about this treatment whilst in hardship. They have written back saying 'I can confirm you did not supply proof of your income and expenditure form. I understand you agreed with the CCCS to complete and submit your own monthly budget form to us. Unfortunately you did not do this and your account was passed back to Viking Collections.' Now this is complete tosh - the income/expenditure forms + list of creditors we sent was all done on CCCS headed paper, as was sent to us by CCCS to give to all our creditors. At no time had we agreedwith CCCS, as they are trying to say, to complete & submit our own monthly budget form. Anyone in, or been in, a similar position with Santander? Any advice at this stage appreciated.

As part of an insurance claim, our insurer has agreed to put us up in a hotel for a few weeks whist repairs are done to our house. Does anyone know if they pay a set rate for meals and if so, how much do they allow and how many meals per day. Thanks

I have now been told by Lloyds that credit card statements prior to 2004 are no longer held - does anyone have proof to the contrary and been sent credit card statements older than 6 years? Also, they say they have been unable to locate a copy of my signed agreement for the account, but they assure me that before they opened the account, they would have required sight of a signed agreement and that if I take the matter further, they are confident in their ability to prove this! Any thoughts on this? Lastly, if I can no longer obtain statements back from 1995, when FOS deal with my PPI claim and if they uphold it, will they only deal with the PPI premiums I can prove were paid over the 6 years statements I have? Could they not even do an estimate of what I would have paid in premiums for all those previous years 1995-2006?

Does anyone have any old credit card PPI booklets/policy summaries as issued by LLoyds Tsb from around 1998 on? Also would be interested to hear from anyone who has been sent any credit card statements from further than 6 years eg from 1998 - 2004.

I've received back all the gumpf from Llloyds as a result of my SAR request for my PPI claim. However, credit card statements have only been supplied since 2004. I took out my first card inc PPI when they were just TSB/trustcard, around 1998 - does anyone know if they should usually hold/supply statements from this far back? They've also neglected to send me the original credit card Agreement as I'd requested, all they've sent is one I'd signed only in 2006 when I transferred to a different card.