Moonwitch V MBNA

[shakespeare62]

sorry for typo's - make that constitute breaches of OFT Debt Collection Guidance [OFT 664]

 

its available online to view / download at :-

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf

[rory32]

Hi moonwhich7

 

Try not to panic, selling the account really isn't necessarily a big deal.

 

We really need to see the copy of the application form. If it's from 1994 it's highly unlikely that it is enforceable.

 

As previously stated, on no accounts should she be turning this probably unenforceable unsecured debt into a secured one.

 

DCA's have no legal powers whatsoever and no they don't come knocking at your door.

 

If your Mum receives any phone calls from them she just needs to put the phone down and not enter into a conversation with them. A sort of pre-emptive strike would be for your Mum to just change her phone number if she's okay with that. All she needs to do is phone up her supplier and say that she is being harassed (doesn't need to be true) and they will change her number straight away. The alternative is to wait and see if they phone and if they do then get call barring.

As a last resort, if you do not think you can manage all this, I would be willing to let you email me the file and I could do it for you (confidentiality assured), if the mods think that would be acceptable,

Speaking as an ex-moderator I don't think that would be a problem although you may be more comfortable with one of the site team doing this if they were willing.

Now I am more than worried what can I possibly do now. I have not received the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) requested but that won't really matter when they sell it on.

Oh yes it will matter. The account is in dispute. The DCA is highly likely to back off once they know this.

[robcag]

Alleged Credit Agreement uploaded for moonwhich7

 

After a little behind the scenes contact between myself and moonwhich7 I can now bring things back on-forum with the copy of the application form which was sent to mw7s mum below. It was a bad copy so I asked her to get her friend who has the 'original' faxed copy to read out the contents of Section 11 on the form just to make sure there was nothing significant in there. I have copied below the image the contents of that section as emailed to me.

 

IMHO the application form is exactly that as I can see no prescribed terms (or any reference to these overleaf or elsewhere on the document) which would make it enforceable as a properly executed agreement.

 

Anybody else care to comment?

 

 

Contents of Section 11;

moonwhich7 - "Ok Here it is, there are a couple of blanks where the stamp is over the words but I think we have most of it."

 

Principals Cardholders Application and Declaration

 

Please issue an MBNA Visa card to me. I confirm that the information given is true and complete. You may make such enquiries as you condier necessary in connection with this application or cedit agreement. I authorise you to disclose any information about me and my MBNA visa card account to a cedit reference agency who may ? record of any such search information has registered and is used only to make cedit decisions , occasional for fraud protection or trace ? to date. I have never been bankcrupt or entered into a agreement with debtors or had any judgement or debt outstanding. I accept and agree to be bound to MBNA visa card conditions. ? commision paid allowed on any insurance arranged through the bank includes any subsidory as ? company. I understand that shoud my application for the MBNA visa gold card not be approved this request constitutes my application for the standard visa card. Please issue it to me accordingly. I accept that on a periodic basis I may be requested for an automatic upgrade for the MBNA Gold card at MBNA discretion. If my application is accepted I authorise you to issue and additional MBNA visa card to the person named as an additional cardholder of my MBNA visa card account. Delete this sentence is not applicable.

 

Your Right To Cancel

 

Cheers

Rob

[robcag]

I accept and agree to be bound to MBNA visa card conditions. ? commision paid allowed on any insurance arranged through the bank includes any subsidory

 

Having strained my eyes to try and read the bit in Section 11 of the document represented by the red questionmark in the bit quoted above, I see there are several words there and I'm wondering what they say as they could be significant. I'm curious as to whether they might be some reference to 'overleaf' or similar.

 

If so, was the reverse of the document supplied (which may have contained T&Cs) ?

 

The illegibility of the document supplied would make it unenforceable in itself, but that does not mean MBNA do not have a legible copy. However they would need to have the original to be able to show that the signature document and any T&Cs claimed to be overleaf were one and the same.

 

Cheers

Rob

[dpick]

Hi from my experience with MBNA they would have copied the agreement to microfiche then destroyed the original. With my agreement originally Bank of Scotland purchased in 2004 by MBNA they only copied the front of the agreement nothing else and the agreement as presented for both CCA and S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) contained no prescribed terms and was unenforceable so it is possible that you could be in the same position.

 

all the best dpick:)

[Chalkitup]

Having strained my eyes to try and read the bit in Section 11 of the document represented by the red questionmark in the bit quoted above, I see there are several words there and I'm wondering what they say as they could be significant. I'm curious as to whether they might be some reference to 'overleaf' or similar.

 

If so, was the reverse of the document supplied (which may have contained T&Cs) ?

 

The illegibility of the document supplied would make it unenforceable in itself, but that does not mean MBNA do not have a legible copy. However they would need to have the original to be able to show that the signature document and any T&Cs claimed to be overleaf were one and the same.

 

Cheers

Rob

 

 

Evening All,

 

I am off out again soon but I have several "application forms" like that one in my database and I believe I have a copy of my own original in my folders.

 

Had a quick look at a few and the wording on them is ............. I accept and agree to be bound to MBNA visa card conditions OF USE AS SET OUT OVERLEAF AND AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME.

 

 

subsidory OR ASSOCIATED company

 

As robcag asked .... was the reverse supplied??

 

Onwards and Upwards

 

Chalkitup

[moonwhich7]

You are quite right Chalkitup. I went back to my friend who has almost gone blind trying to fill in the blanks and the exact sentence was as you say

 

'as bound by MBNA conditions of use as set out overleaf and as amende from time to time'

 

They did not supply a copy of them.

 

They did send a copy of terms and conditions the first time when the said they were unable to give me a copy of the original CCA. I will get these scanned to me to see exactly what they say.

 

Doesn't look like we can celebrate yet robcag.

[robcag]

 

Had a quick look at a few and the wording on them is .............

 

 

Hi CIU

 

Thanks for replying to the PM with that info. Not what we wanted to hear but at least it clears it up.

 

Hi mw7

 

 

They did send a copy of terms and conditions the first time when the said they were unable to give me a copy of the original CCA. I will get these scanned to me to see exactly what they say. Yes, that would be best. We can then see if what has been supplied is likely to be the reverse of the signature document or if it plainly is not.

 

Doesn't look like we can celebrate yet robcag. Agreed, but we're not at the end of the road yet

 

After you have got the T&Cs scanned and we have seen them we can put our heads together and think of the next move.

 

If it turns out the T&Cs document is obviously not the reverse of the application form then I can think of 2 options, just my suggestion and obviously others might think of better ideas.

 

As MBNA have threatened to sell the alleged debt soon, that could in fact turn out to be a blessing in disguise.

 

You could consider doing either or both of these 2 things;

1. Write to MBNA (using one of the excellent letters to be found on the forums) telling them that what they have supplied does not satisfy your s.78 request because it is partially illegible and they have not supplied the documents referred to overleaf. (They are also supposed to provide a copy of the original T&Cs which were in force at the time of opening the account).

 

2. Wait until you hear from the new owner of the debt and bang in a new CCA s.78 request immediately to them

without

telling them you have already made a request to MBNA. You can then wait and see what the DCA comes up with (if anything). It seems that it is very common for the debt to be sold on without any paperwork, and often the original creditor does not go out of their way to help the new owner of the debt.

Just an idea to think about until someone else suggests something. If you need any of the letters I mentioned just shout and I or someone else will point you in the right direction .

 

You said earlier in the thread that the account had not been paid for some time due to your mum forgetting about it so I would imagine that there are considerable penalty charges that have been added during this time. If so, any idea how much this would add up to?

 

Furthermore, your mum has received a DN I believe? Have you got a scan of it that we could see so that someone can determine whether the DN was in fact valid? This can be something which can cause a potential court claim to fail (as I well know because I won a case against HFC due to pt2537 noticing that my DN was defective).

 

Cheers

Rob

[car2403]

I think you need to continue challenging the CCA, rather than wait for a DCA to get stuck in - at the most, that would result in the debt being returned to the OC and you'd be back at square one.

 

Send them this;

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Account Number: XXX

 

Re; your recent reply to my request under section 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

I note that you have replied to the above by sending a copy of an application form and your companies current Terms and conditions I must inform you that this is not sufficient to comply with the request and that your company is still in default under the act.

 

To clarify, just sending the Terms and Conditions is a breach of the Act and Regulations as, apart from the information that the Regulations provide that you may exclude, the copy must be a “true copy” of the agreement.

 

This breach of the agreement can be demonstrated as follows;

As you will know section 180(1) (b) authorises, “the omission from a copy of certain material from the original, or the inclusion of certain material in condensed form.” This refers to statutory instruments made under the heading Copies of document regulations and in this care in particular to SI 1983/1557.

 

Before leaving section 180 there are two other sections that should be remembered these are:

 

Section 2(2) (a) A duty imposed by any provision of this Act (except section 35) to supply a copy of any document is not satisfied unless the copy supplied is in the prescribed form and conforms to the prescribed requirements;

 

And more importantly

 

Section 2(b) A duty imposed by any provision of this Act (except section 35) to supply a copy of any document is not infringed by the omission of any material, or its inclusion in condensed form, if that is authorised by regulations.

 

You will see that this quite clearly states that whilst certain items may be left out of the copy document the rest of the document must be in the form and contain all items as prescribed by the regulations.

 

Turning to the regulations regarding what may be omitted from these copies these are contained with SI 1983/1557.

 

The regulations state:

(2) There may be omitted from any such copy-

(a) any information included in an executed agreement, security instrument or other document relating to the debtor, hirer or surety or included for the use of the creditor or owner only which is not required to be included therein by the Act or any Regulations thereunder as to the form and content of the document of which it is a copy;

(b) any signature box, signature or date of signature (other than, in the case of a copy of a cancelable executed agreement delivered to the debtor under section 63(1) of the Act, the date of signature by the debtor of an agreement to which section 68(b) of the Act applies);

 

It is quite clear what can be omitted from the copy document, this again asserts that all other details of the agreement should presented in form and content as required by the regulations.

 

The requirements of the Agreement regulations 1983/1553 are very explicit in describing the form and content of an agreement and this as I have demonstrated also applies to the copy of any such agreement with the above mentioned proviso.

 

Nowhere within these regulations does it state that part of the agreement can be presented on a separate document headed terms and conditions.

It does state that all terms and conditions should be within the agreement document and is explicit of the form in which it is presented.

 

Furthermore, Wilson and another v Hurstanger Ltd also confirmed that the prescribed terms must be within the agreement document;

 

"33 In my judgment the objective of Schedule 6 is to ensure that, as an inflexible condition of enforceability, certain basic minimum terms are included which the parties (with the benefit of legal advice if necessary) and/or the court can identify within the four corners of the

agreement. Those minimum provisions combined with the requirement under s 61 that all the terms should be in a single document, and

backed up by the provisions of section 127(3), ensure that these core terms are expressly set out in the agreement itself: they cannot be

orally agreed; they cannot be found in another document; they cannot be implied; and above all they cannot be in the slightest mis-stated.

As a matter of policy, the lender is denied any room for manoeuvre in respect of them. On the other hand, they are basic provisions, and

the only question for the court is whether they are, on a true construction, included in the agreement. More detailed requirements, which are designed to ensure that the debtor is made aware, so far as possible, of specified information (including information contained in the

minimum terms) are to be found in Schedule 1."

 

I note that you have replied to the above by sending an illegible copy agreement. I must inform you that this is not sufficient to comply with the request. To clarify, The Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 SI No. 1557 states:

 

"Legibility of notices and copy documents and wording of prescribed Forms

2.-(1) The lettering in every notice in a Form prescribed by these Regulations and in every copy of an executed agreement, security instrument or other document referred to in the Act and delivered or sent to a debtor, hirer or surety under any provision of the Act shall, apart from any signature, be easily legible and of a colour which is readily distinguishable from the colour of the paper."

 

I hope this explains why your reply was unacceptable I await a True copy of my agreement and would remind you again that whilst the request has not been complied with the default continues

 

Yours faithfully

 

If they do sell on to a DCA, you don't need to make another CCA request to them - all you need to do is send a copy of all the correspondance you've had with the OC and remind them that the account still remains in dispute until the issue is resolved and that continuing to collect on the outstanding balance is likely to be against the ethic behind the OFT's Debt Collection Guidance and is definately going to be a breach of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regs 2008

[ouch123]

Hi - I am a total novice and was just wondering about the following:

 

The doc has "Application Form" as its main title, and then "Credit Agreement......" as a secondary subtitle.

 

Which is it?

 

An "application" is usually a precurser to an agreement, not an agreement itself.

 

From a legal perspective, can it be both? Doesn't the ambiguity confuse the consumer?

 

Is there any merit in the arguement that the consumer thought the were signing an Application Form - not an Agreement?

 

If anyone has the answer to this please let us know. It could be relevant in MW's situation.

Edited October 18, 2008 by ouch123
Clarifying something I wrote

[robcag]

Hi Chris

 

I acknowledge that you are far more experienced and knowledgeable than me in these matters, but my suggestion to do something which I agree is not strictly neccessary (by sending a second CCA request to the DCA rather than pointing out that the debt is already in dispute) was not without reason .

 

So far I have done this twice, both for different reasons, and so far achieved the desired result both times. I won't name the OCs or DCAs in this thread in case either of them identify me from previous posts in other threads.

 

The first time (which is broadly similar to the situation here) was after an OC had produced an arguable 2-sided photocopy of an application form in response to my CCA request, but as it turned out that OC was already in the process of selling the alleged debt. Although I could have argued there was no statement on the signature side to link it with the T&Cs on the reverse, I decided when I received the notice of assignment etc. from the DCA shortly afterwards to CCA them and see what turned up.

 

That was over 6 months ago and so far after an initial series of letters (which have now stopped) from the DCA saying they were attempting to get the documents from the OC, they have not come up with anything. In the meantime I stopped making token payments to the OC and have not paid them or the DCA a penny since.

 

The second instance of making a CCA request which I made to the DCA was for more complicated and sensitive reasons which I won't reveal here (although I have described it elsewhere), but it achieved the desired result. I got a non-enforceable application form from the DCA.

 

Cheers

Rob

Edited October 18, 2008 by robcag
added 'both times' in 2nd paragraph

[car2403]

Hi - I am a total novice and was just wondering about the following:

 

The doc has "Application Form" as its main title, and then "Credit Agreement......" as a secondary subtitle.

 

Which is it?

 

An "application" is usually a precurser to an agreement, not an agreement itself.

 

From a legal perspective, can it be both? Doesn't the ambiguity confuse the consumer?

 

Is there any merit in the arguement that the consumer thought the were signing an Application Form - not an Agreement?

 

If anyone has the answer to this please let us know. It could be relevant in MW's situation.

 

Hi Ouch. (Nice UN, by the way!)

 

An Application form can be a Credit Agreement, but it must contain the prescribed terms under s.60/s.61 and be signed by the debtor as a minimum to allow enforcement under s.65/s.127(3) CCA 1974.

 

It is confusing, but what you need to look out for are Application forms that don't contain the prescribed terms, as they are totally unenforceable in Court.

 

Hi Chris

 

I acknowledge that you are far more experienced and knowledgeable than me in these matters, but my suggestion to do something which I agree is not strictly neccessary (by sending a second CCA request to the DCA rather than pointing out that the debt is already in dispute) was not without reason .

 

So far I have done this twice, both for different reasons, and so far achieved the desired result both times. I won't name the OCs or DCAs in this thread in case either of them identify me from previous posts in other threads.

 

The first time (which is broadly similar to the situation here) was after an OC had produced an arguable 2-sided photocopy of an application form in response to my CCA request, but as it turned out that OC was already in the process of selling the alleged debt. Although I could have argued there was no statement on the signature side to link it with the T&Cs on the reverse, I decided when I received the notice of assignment etc. from the DCA shortly afterwards to CCA them and see what turned up.

 

That was over 6 months ago and so far after an initial series of letters (which have now stopped) from the DCA saying they were attempting to get the documents from the OC, they have not come up with anything. In the meantime I stopped making token payments to the OC and have not paid them or the DCA a penny since.

 

The second instance of making a CCA request which I made to the DCA was for more complicated and sensitive reasons which I won't reveal here (although I have described it elsewhere), but it achieved the desired result. I got a non-enforceable application form from the DCA.

 

Cheers

Rob

 

Hi Rob,

 

Agreed that a 2nd CCA request may get a result with the DCA, but what I'm saying is that it isn't necessary - all you should need to prove is that the account is in dispute and the debt should be returned to the OC. Most DCA's don't want unenforceable debts on their books, especially during this credit crunch period.

 

I can see how it can get a result, as has happened with you in the past, so it just depends how much you want to hold on to your £1 postal orders. Personally, IMHO, 1 CCA request should be enough for each debt - and I don't want to make any DCA's life easier by sending them another £1 for their profits.

 

Each to their own, I suppose, but this is one where we can outline the case for both opinions and let the OP decide - neither way is right nor wrong, so there's nothing to lose, really.

[robcag]

Hi Chris

 

 

Agreed that a 2nd CCA request may get a result with the DCA, but what I'm saying is that it isn't necessary - agreed all you should need to prove is that the account is in dispute and the debt should be returned to the OC. I agree Most DCA's don't want unenforceable debts on their books, especially during this credit crunch period. Probably true as well!

 

I can see how it can get a result, as has happened with you in the past, so it just depends how much you want to hold on to your £1 postal orders. I would have liked to hang on to my £1 AND the £4.60 SD cost, but decided that it might be justifiable (and it was , at least for now) Personally, IMHO, 1 CCA request should be enough for each debt - agreed, I would normally follow that advice, and that is what I have done with a larger number of alleged debts and I don't want to make any DCA's life easier by sending them another £1 for their profits who would? .

 

Each to their own, I suppose, but this is one where we can outline the case for both opinions and let the OP decide - neither way is right nor wrong, so there's nothing to lose, really. Yes, I did say in my post above (#33) that it might be an idea to do either or both of the suggestions. Maybe 'both' would be the best way. Slightly more hassle and expense to start with, but might just get a result in that options are opened up with who to argue with and who to ignore (OC or DCA).

 

 

As outlined above, I agree wholeheartedly with what you are saying, but IMHO, in some circumstances, for the relatively small cost of possibly putting a spanner in the works for whoever buys/chases the alleged debt, I think it is worth a try.

 

Don't forget that mw7 is not yet in the clear as it is possible that MBNA can come up with a more legible copy which has that undesirable reference to the 'terms overleaf' clearly readable, although as has already been pointed out on the thread, it is unlikely that MBNA still has the two-sided original.

 

The only reason I am advocating this here is that it appears that the alleged debt is very close to (possibly already done) being sold on, and if the DCA cannot get a better 'agreement' from the OC than has already been supplied then I would think they would have a problem.

 

Cheers

Rob

[car2403]

As outlined above, I agree wholeheartedly with what you are saying, but IMHO, in some circumstances, for the relatively small cost of possibly putting a spanner in the works for whoever buys/chases the alleged debt, I think it is worth a try.

 

I know, but what is relatively small to you and I may not be to the OP or those reading the thread.

[robcag]

I know, but what is relatively small to you and I may not be to the OP or those reading the thread.

 

Agreed, but maybe they can make some small sacrifices.

 

£1.00 PO (£1.45 ish ?)

PLUS

£1.07 Recorded delivery (slightly less for 2nd class); OR

£4.60 Special delivery (preferred method)

 

Anyway, I'm off to get a coffee and my daily mars bar, and watch the F1 qualifying which I've got recorded! £0.50 ish

 

Cheers

Rob

[Chalkitup]

Hello,

 

Question for Moonwitch (or perhaps robcag can answer as I believe you were sent the form but it might have been chopped already by the friend of Moonwitch thus cutting off the refs I am trying to find) .....

 

On the application form you received ..... are there any other reference numbers / letters at all either top or bottom or even down the sides of the form .... i.e. like CC6084 that appears in the bottom right hand corner.

 

This info I need may not be relevant to your problems Moonwitch but it will give me valuable knowledge to help me regarding other MBNA application / agreements that Caggers have received. I am sure robcag knows the forms I refer too.

 

Thank you.

 

Onwards and Upwards

 

Chalkitup

[robcag]

Hi CIU

 

Hello,

 

Question for Moonwitch (or perhaps robcag can answer as I believe you were sent the form but it might have been chopped already by the friend of Moonwitch thus cutting off the refs I am trying to find) .....

 

On the application form you received ..... are there any other reference numbers / letters at all either top or bottom or even down the sides of the form .... i.e. like CC6084 that appears in the bottom right hand corner.

 

This info I need may not be relevant to your problems Moonwitch but it will give me valuable knowledge to help me regarding other MBNA application / agreements that Caggers have received. I am sure robcag knows the forms I refer too.

 

Thank you.

 

Onwards and Upwards

 

Chalkitup

 

Sorry, but unfortunately I no longer have the 'original' (pre-blanked) copy which mw7 sent me as in the interests of confidentiality I deleted the email containing it as soon as I had uploaded the obscured copy, and that is all I now remain in possession of.

 

There were some numbers which may have been reference numbers on the form, which as I couldn't decide whether they were relevant to the account, I blocked out. I probably was a bit over-cautious with the obscuring for the reason that it was not my own personal details.

 

However, for my part, the form has not been chopped in width or height.

 

All the bits that have been obscured are indicated by the grey colour in the blocking, the long grey bar at the top is just fax-header details.

 

Yes CIU, I know the forms you are referring to.

 

Maybe if you indicate any particular grey blocks on the uploaded copy to mw7 she can tell you what was underneath.

 

Again, sorry I can't help you with that.

 

Cheers

Rob

[moonwhich7]

Hello and thanks to everybody who is posting on my thread. I appreciate all of your input. Unfortunately I am working all weekend but not able to get near a computor long enough to read all your suggestions.

 

Hopefully I wll be home by seven tonight ( it was ten last night and I was exhausted) and will sit down and try to take all of this in. It is nice to see there are still battles to be fought and the fat lady isn't singing yet.

 

Rob I havn't managed to contact my friend to get the TC's scanned to me yet but when I do it would be great if you could do your magic again to get them uploaded for me.

 

Looking forward to planning the next attack.

 

Bye for now.

 

Moon

[Chalkitup]

Thank you for your reply Rob,

 

From what you say it looks like the only ref number around the outside of the form is CC6084.

 

That fits in with my findings so far for an application from the early 90's.

 

Moonwitch ....... may I ask ...... the blocked grey box under the MBNA logo in the top left hand corner ..... is that a number beginning with the letter N .... i.e. ... like ... N178006C

 

And at the top on the right is one of those blocked out boxes hiding a 7 digit number ... i.e. 5389263

 

If that is the case then these are MBNA reference numbers for their forms in the 90's ..... later ones have the ref numbers printed around the edge.

 

Onwards and Upwards

 

Chalkitup

[moonwhich7]

Hello Chalkitup

 

Yes you are right, the number in the top left does begin with an N with six numbers following a space then a number and a letter. Under the visa sign are nine numbers starting with a zero no spacing. Underneath the handwritten number 94 there are six other numbers handwritten.

 

Let me know if the actual numbers are relevant to you and I will PM them.

 

Hope this is of help. If you need any other info let me know.

 

Moon

Edited October 20, 2008 by moonwhich7

[Chalkitup]

Hello Chalkitup

 

Yes you are right, the number in the top left does begin with an N with six numbers following a space then a number and a letter. Under the visa sign are nine numbers starting with a zero no spacing. Underneath the handwritten number 94 there are six other numbers handwritten.

 

Let me know if the actual numbers are relevant to you an I will PM them.

 

Hope this is of help. If you need any other info let me know.

 

Moon

 

 

Hello Moonwitch,

 

It would be very helpful if you could pm the printed numbers to me then I can compare them with some other forms I am working on for other Caggers.

Not the handwritten one .... as that will be a reference to your account and not a general MBNA form reference.

 

Thank you

 

Onwards and Upwards

 

Chalkitup

[moonwhich7]

As I am not sure which direction to go with the CCA issue yet, until all info has been looked at, seems the jury is still out on the enforceability of this one ( have sent TC's to Rob, there are 3 pages so are unlikely to be the original one's printed on the back of the application form, hope this is relevant ). I have decided to attack from another angle.

 

I have had conversations with the Office of Fair Trading, Financial Ombudsman Services and the Trading Standards who have agreed that I have grounds for complaint. The FOS are sending a complaint form to me to set things in motion.

 

Do I have to let MBNA know what I am doing? I think I read somewhere that I am supposed to complain to them first but can't find it now. I am really not at all interested in what they have to say anymore, just want to get them into BIG trouble. There treatment of my mother has been disgusting and I am sick of them.

 

 

 

Any opinions anyone?

 

Moon

Edited October 20, 2008 by moonwhich7

[angel_1]

hiya Moonwhich

 

interesting what you have said in above post no 47

 

have you in any of your letters expressed disatisfaction or put formal or just complaint in any of your letters ?

 

im sure then they should have treated this is a complaint from you, im going to check out the fsa site later to see what the guidelines are - i believe that a company should have at least 8 weeks to resolve your complaint if they cannot to your satisfaction then they should refer you to the ombudsman, but as i say will recheck this as this was my understanding

 

taraaaaaaaaa for now ciao maz

[car2403]

The FOS are sending a complaint form to me to set things in motion.

 

The complaint form is available for download via their website;

 

Financial Ombudsman Service

 

TBH, complaining probably isn't worth it, IMHO. The FOS are notorious for ignoring legal precedent and applying their own principles, which usually results in a decision for the Bank, not the customer.

 

IMHO, the best way to challenge any of this is by addressing the issues you have with the CCA, then taking Court action if appropriate to enforce your rights.

 

There's a reason why these companies promote the Ombudsman - and it isn't because they are fair and impartial, IMHO.

 

[moonwhich7]

Oh!

 

Feels like someone just burst by birthday balloon.