Militant Consumer's Friend v Egg Loans PPI - WON

[militantconsumer]

... even 41 days would be something that the ICO should be cracking down upon.

 

The requirement is for the SAR is NOT for the information to be provided within 40 days. It is for the information to be provided promptly and in any event within 40 days.

 

The 40 days is an absolute maximum anyone should be required to wait no matter what, not merely a target to be missed routinely.

 

Then start the thread that Jonesyblod has suggested, and we can all compare notes and make our complaints to the Information Commissioner.

 

I know that Egg have a big post backlog because they told my friend this when they tried to get her to fill in an income and expenditure form over the phone.

 

Perhaps they need to employ more people who are capable of reading and writing letters?

 

But, given the situation that Citigroup are in at the moment, I dare say we're about to hear that Egg are going to sack, rather than recruit, a few thousand staff.

[phatram]

subbing

[militantconsumer]

Here is a link to OFT guidance on multiple agreements:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/177130-hp-agreement-please-help-4.html#post2015048

 

It's dated 2005 but, as atwozee points out:

 

"I guess you have to ask why the OFT thought there was a need to put together such a guide – maybe because many of the agreements previously could be seen as being flawed and it was a warning to creditors to clean up their act.

 

S18 always applied to multi part loans regardless of when the guide was written – they just put into writing what was already relevant IMO."

[militantconsumer]

Was in court today and had an interesting discussion with the judge, who knew his stuff about the CCA - and was definitely wearing his CAG underpants outside his trousers.

 

One of the many defences we had submitted was that the loan in question was a payment for goods, a payment by cheque to make the balance up to £1k, and a PPI premium. I had used the s18 argument but his opinion was that the only sort of loan that would fall into the multiple agrements definition was for example where a loan and credit card were lumped into one agreement.

 

This was his opinion, but as he helped us in many other ways he was being constructive I believe.

 

Not so positive about the s18 arguments with reference to PPI.

 

But does tend to support N.P.'s line of thinking about funds diverted to pay off Egg Cards as being s18. Don't forget that one of our 3 loan agreements did feature this.

 

On second thoughts, on re-reading this, does the judge just mean to say that it wouldn't be permissable for a credit agreement to combine a loan and a credit card into one agreement in general? (I.e. two parts to the contract going forward, not just what it was used to pay off?)

[N.P]

Thanks for the confidence boost mc.

 

It would seem these Judges can say anything on the day.

 

I think the PPI arguement, I would say is a double agreement with Credit Cards because the PPI is funded from the credit available on the Card, therefore restricting the amount of available credit.

 

I`m not so sure about the Loan + PPI arguement though, as they tend to show the amount of the Loan and also the amount of the PPI, and I guess that will be there way out of this.

 

I`m sticking to my arguement about my Egg Loan though

[militantconsumer]

Right, I think we have run out of patience now.

 

Egg have completely ignored us since 1st January. They seem content to just take £50 per month for the next 10 years but not make too much of a fuss about calling us or asking us to pay more.

 

They have failed to respond to important questions such as:

1. Give us a copy of our loan statements so we can see what penalties we have been charged

2. Tell us how you calculated the top ups

3. Give us copies of the phone calls where you sold us the PPI

4. What the hell is "full 180pp auto accept"?

 

I think we will start a generic PPI complaint with the FOS, mentioning that Egg have ignored our requests for information. That will lead to a letter from FOS to Egg, telling them (giving them a chance) to investigate.

 

I think I am right in saying that this will put the account in dispute and we will be within our rights to stop paying for however long it takes FOS to make their decision. Egg have already defaulted the account, so they can hardly trash the credit file any further.

 

Meanwhile, I follow other Egg cases with interest to see if and when we get a court decision on the section 18 multiple agreement arguments - either for the PPI elements of these loans, or for the restricted funds to pay off an Egg card elements.

Edited March 20, 2009 by militantconsumer

[a1b2c3]

Hi

There is a thread on the forum discussing getting paperwork on CCA and PPI under the court disclosure rules and not s77/78.

The theory is that this makes the company take more notice because you are acting more litigious and not just looking for a standoff.

The FOS are snowed under.

Don't expect any action this century!!!!

I would suggest taking the fight to Egg.

I have found one company claiming not to take any upfront fees or success fees if you can't do it yourself.

Try Edit

I have no shares or interest in this company.

Edited March 23, 2009 by saintly_1
removal of commercial links

[militantconsumer]

An update.

 

Egg have finally responded to our January letter (of which we had to send a second copy in March due to no reply).

 

Their response is a holding letter in which they apologise for taking so long to reply, and they say they will now carry out an investigation.

 

Don't forget, we haven't even got as far as complaining about mis-sold PPI or the section 18 multiple agreements angle yet. All we have done is ask a few follow-up questions to the SAR - as listed in post #81 above.

 

We have now also cancelled our monthly payment, and we do not intend to pay another penny until this is all resolved, if at all ever again.

[militantconsumer]

We have received another holding letter from Egg - stating that "enquiries are continuing" and apologising for taking so long to reach a decision.

 

4 months have now passed since we asked some questions at the start of the year. Not a complaint, just a few questions. None of them have been answered yet.

 

No problem, Egg, take as long as you like.

 

Just don't expect any payments from us in the meantime.

[BEC01]

We have received another holding letter from Egg - stating that "enquiries are continuing" and apologising for taking so long to reach a decision.

 

4 months have now passed since we asked some questions at the start of the year. Not a complaint, just a few questions. None of them have been answered yet.

 

No problem, Egg, take as long as you like.

 

Just don't expect any payments from us in the meantime.

Be interesting to hear how long this goes on for militant.

It probably is unenforceable, and they probably know.

 

May suit them to keep it open but not to pursue.

[militantconsumer]

We finally received a letter back from Egg loans.

 

 

[militantconsumer]

My friend's first reaction on reading this letter was that it reads like it has been written by a child!

 

Anyway, the obvious comments to make are these:-

 

1. We never made a complaint, we just asked for information under the Data Protection Act

 

2. The letter says our complaint has been upheld(!)

 

3. They respond to our request for a loan statement by saying they have already sent one

 

4. The top up figures in the table are not the 'calculation' that we requested.

 

5. There is an ambiguous statement that implies Egg may not have retained copies of the telephone conversations when the PPI was sold - but they are quite clearly stating that they refuse to provide copies anyway, even if they exist.

 

6. The explantion of what full 90/180 means suggests that the PPI policies were severely devalued in the rates at which they pay out from one loan to the next. Was this ever disclosed at the time?

[militantconsumer]

Egg have sent us an "Annual Egg Loan statement" completely out of the blue and without any request from us.

 

This shows that £73 has been refunded in January, and therefore the letter we wrote back then has been acted on:

 

We have written a letter to Egg asking them to cancel any payment protection insurance that is still in force. I think it's important to do this now that we realise the PPI was optional and not explained properly to us when it was taken out. And, of course, there might be a small refund due, even at this late stage. Every little helps!

 

The statement also shows that no payments have been made since 4th March, and yet there has been no attempt at enforcement whatsoever.

 

Perhaps their confusion over the Data Protection Request has suppressed the account during this time.

[Viscount Stair]

A requirement to provide annual statements for fixed sum credit (eg loans) was introduced on 1 October 2008, the first statement having to be produced within 12 months of that date.

 

I got an annual statement for my Egg Loan fairly recently too but I don't know whether they are doing all loans at this time of year or if that is just coincidence.

 

For the record, mine posed more new questions than it answered outstanding old ones.

[angry cat]

I have investigated the complaint and I can now happily confirm that the complaint has been closed. We regularly close complaints that may stay open for no other reason other than we don't like open complaints as they make the place look messy and look bad on our 'open complaints' meter that sits above my boss' door. If you think we shouldn't have closed your open complaint, please complain again and I will be happy to close another open complaint from you. If you don't know how to complain, please complain again this time stating that you require a booklet from us stating how a complaint should be worded to avoid being closed immediately on opening as we are too busy closing opened complaints to investigate an open complaint. We are able, though, to investigate a closed complaint, but on the whole this usually comprises of a statement to the effect of we have investigated the closed complaint and can confirm it is still closed, whereby we are able to close the current complaint asking whether or not the previously closed complaint remains closed. If you feel that a closed complaint should be re-opened, please re-issue a complaint to this department. Once we receive a new complaint we will check this against our previous complaint database and at that time ascertain whether or not we have previously closed a complaint from you on that subject. If this is the case we will happily close the new open complaint and send you another letter stating that we have again checked to see whether or not the complaint you sent in matched a previous complaint and again we were happy to close said complaint as the previous complaint had been closed to our satisfaction. Please find enclosed an application form you can send to us at our complaints address asking for our complaints proceedure. Please place this in an envelope and mark it 'NOT A COMPLAINT' as we sometimes have a streamligned process in place where all letters not marked in this manner are opened by a machine operated by a monkey and then placed directly in the bin. If you would like to complain to us regarding this procedure, please write in and complain about this too. Please, feel free to complain again whenever you believe you have been wronged by our organisation, but be aware that our commitment to complaints is restricted to the lipservice required to satisfy the quasi-political regulatory services we fund to ensure any complaints we are unable to close in this manner are closed by another quango, who, by the way, we play golf with on a weekly basis and infact they are married to my little sister.

 

Please feel free to waste another few trees to check whether or not we are complying with our complaints proceedure, but rest assured we are registered to British Standard 26675246 (complain) which basically means we can do whatever we want as there is nothing you can do about it.

 

 

AC

[JonCris]

lol

[SillyEgg1]

Hi,

 

I am new to the forum and have read a lot of the posts re Egg Loans (esp consolidated C/cards with loan) and I find myself in the same positon as Militantconsumer's friend.

 

I have gathered all the info I have re my Egg loan and lo and behold, I have not had a statement of account and believe my loan is also unenforceable. I am going to send off a SAR to see exactly what they have. I will upload the CCA when they send me the copy they have on their files.

 

Do I take it that if they fail to provide me with a copy of the original CCA that the contract becomes unenforceable? In addition, I do not have a "total amount of credit" nor details of the C/card that was consolidated into the loan. I simply have a principle loan amount, the amount of months payable and the amount payable per month. No total amount of credit, nor total amount payable with credit and principle loan.

[cds]

I think you need to start a thread on the egg forum and scan up your docs for best help.

 

cds:-)

[militantconsumer]

We have decided to make a complaint about the PPI on these loan accounts. I have heard that the FOS are deciding 99% of complaints against Egg in the customer's favour at the moment.

 

I don't know how much this could wipe off the balance as Egg have not been very cooperative in providing information to us. But as a minimum it will take it below £5,000 which should mean that any legal action ends up on the small claims track rather than with a risk of having to pay Egg's costs.

 

We wrote a letter to Egg on Saturday and have sent it off in today's post by recorded delivery. I'm sure they will reject our complaint, and then we will complain to the FOS.

[militantconsumer]

An interesting test case that may have the same s18 multiple agreement as ours:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/180461-egg-county-court-summons-13.html

 

And another issue to think about:

Another question (and apologies in advance if I've already asked and can't find the answer)

 

Presumably Egg will have received a commission for the PPI and that is included in the amount that they charged me for the policy?

 

If that is the case am I right in thinking that this is a charge for credit and therefore shouldn't attract interest?

 

If I've got that completely wrong then please blame the glass of pinot that's seeing me through my Egging this evening

regards

S

[militantconsumer]

We have just received the letter below from Collect Direct. I have seen plenty of these letters on CAG before and I think the company may be part of the Egg empire (although they don't admit to this).

 

In the OFT guidance on Debt Collection it states, under the heading "Physical/psychological harassment", that "pressurising debtors to pay in full, in unreasonably large instalments" is an example of an "unfair practice".

 

Would demanding that over £5,000 is paid within 4 days fall within this category?

 

[N.P]

Hi mc,

 

As far as I can see, they don`t appear to be connected to Egg.

 

They are registered with Companies House and also have a valid CC Licence.

 

However, also under OFT guidelines, are they not supposed to take payment via Credit Cards? This is effectively paying one debt while creating a larger debt. Silly people!

 

4 days to pay £5,000? No doubt they will have sent the letter 2nd class late last week, in the hope you call them with 1 day left to pay up, or die.

 

I`m not so sure if they are the Specialists they claim though.

[citizenB]

4 days from when.. :-? the date of the letter, the day you received it.(which might be never if this postal dispute continues??).. Next christmas ??

 

They are not to communicate in an ambiguous manner.

 

This is a blatant attempt to get you to phone them:evil:

[N.P]

Yep, another bunch of idiots with another bunch of nonsense.

 

They should be bombed with all the others

[militantconsumer]

Phone call this afternoon.........

 

Collect Direct: We want to discuss your account.

MC's friend: I will only communicate with you in writing.

Collect Direct: But we wrote to you and you didn't reply.

MC's friend: I did reply.

Collect Direct: You can't have replied, we've only had the account 4 days.

 

Spot the deliberate mistake.