Ebay asked me to refund a buyer, i did, then they refunded him as well, now asking me for money

[tifo]

Hi,

 

I had a Marbles account which was 70% written off in 2004/2005 and they offered an interest free loan to pay off the 30% over a number of years.

 

My understanding was that the Marbles account had been written off completely as i signed a new Credit Agreement for the loan. This was how it was explained to me at the time.

 

My Experian and Equifax credit files show both accounts, the loan one being upto date and the Marbles account as satisfied. They have not been updating this since June 2004.

 

However, on Callcredit the Marbles account still shows the full outstanding balance and they have been updating this every month, upto Jan 2007 when i got my report.

 

I have rung them and they say the Marbles account is showing as part settled and that when you clear the 30% it will show the full account as settled. They have merged the accounts, but the Callcredit info always shows the full Marbles amount and never goes down, despite me paying towards the 30% every month. The report for that account shows the correct amounts. They also state that you can have two reports/defaults for the one account. So it seems to be merged at their end, but being reported at CRA's separately. The advisor also said you should call the agencies to change the info, i asked her 'are you on something, what are you talking about, CRA's don't do that, HFC is submitting the info to them'.?

 

However, there is something wrong here.

 

Why is it showing as satisfied at two CRA's but as the full balance on Callcredit and being updated regularly?

 

Anyone got any advice for me as they may be breaching Data Protection here, because the info is obviously incorrect and the default at Callcredit is affecting my score.

[tifo]

got a reply back.

 

they admit what i stated in my letter and have updated the Callcredit info.

 

they have offered £10 as a refund for postage and time etc.

 

now, this info was wrong for 33 months (june 2004 - feb 2007), so i am sure i can claim compensation for damage and distress, which i asked for but they refused? How much am i allowed under the Data Protection Act as a reasonable amount?

[tifo]

sent a letter back asking for £5,000 compensation (yes, i know its a lot, but the Financial Ombudsman gives a figure of £1,000 for misreporting to credit agencies, so i thought i'd use the small claims limit and let them make an offer).

 

they admitted it was their mistake and that the automated system overrode the manual settlement they put in on June 2004.

 

lets wait and see ...

[tifo]

HFC have offered all the penalty charges but are refusing any interest, even stat at this stage.

 

This was after i sent a request for charges plus default interest.

 

Has anyone else had CI from them?

 

Plus, re the default does anyone have any advice for me as they have flatly refused to consider any compensation and i cannot prove loss as i have not been applying for loans etc due to credit rating.

[tifo]

anyone?

 

shall i pass it to Ombudsman (had success with others) or the court (would be my first one, not too confident, as don't have POC for credit card).

[tifo]

update ...

 

the bank has replied to me with something not expected.

 

they say they have already taken the charges into consideration as part of my 'short settlement' in 2004 when i paid £600 as settlement of the £2000 balance. What i actually agreed to pay was 30% and they write off 70% hence the £600 payment. The defaults they maintained also reflect this 70% balance and satisfied.

 

Had the charges been taken into consideration, then the default would have had different amounts and i would have been told i was actually paying them £600 + over £1000 charges, which did not happen.

 

So, does anyone have advice for me as the FOS say they are right in that even though you did not complain about the charges, the bank may take them into consideration. Bull!

[tifo]

conclusion to the complain from the FOS .... this is interesting and very one sided.

 

They conclude that :

 

The bank offered to settle at £600 on a balance of £2000. I agree as this was the 30% settlement and 70% write off.

 

They say the bank took charges into account when they wrote off £1400. I disagree as charges were never mentioned, they defaulted me for the 70% (£1400) and then satisfied the account and if charges were taken into account how did they get £600 as 30%?

 

The bank charged me £150 interest on charges.

 

The FOS have awarded me £300 in compensation for a wrongful default.

 

So i am not due any refund of the charges as the bank say they took these into account (but the proof says otherwise).

 

As the bank wrote off £1400 including £1000 charges and £150 interest and i have been awarded £300, the bank gets £250 (difference between £1400 and £1150) and i am awarded £50.

 

So, how can the bank now get money from my compensation for an account that was settled in full in 2004?

 

How can the FOS ignore the fact that the bank DID NOT take charges into account at the time of settlement and what proof did the bank provide for this?

 

Advice please as i am seriously pee'd off with this.

[tifo]

have had a review response from the FOS manager :

 

he's upholding the same decision as before, that HFC are entitled to the amount they wrote off in 2004 and the default entries are correct as they showed the written off amount as settled.

 

but he also says HFC took the charges and interest into account at the time, therefore i ask can the entries be right as they should state £200?

 

i understand what is happening. HFC are bringing the written off amount of £1400 up now and are being given this from my compensation of £1500 with only a £100 left for me. Is this fair to me?

 

Or, they also say they took the charges into account at the time of settlement but are totally ignoring the 30% rate they offered to me to settle. They are saying i paid £600 from £800. Therefore i have been misled into believing i paid 30% because that is what they told me. Am i entitled to the extra 45% i have paid out of the £800?

 

If they are getting a refund now of the amount they are writing off shouldn't the defaults be removed?

 

How shall i take this to court as the argument is on whether they did take charges into account at the time in which case the defaults and settlement of 30% was wrong, or they did not and are asking for the written off amount now.

 

They are saying both, they took the charges and interest into account at the time of settlement but want the money back now.

 

So i end up paying all the money back including charges and interest .....

[tifo]

have you sent a CCA request to Marbles????

It would appear that they are having great difficulty finding anyones "original executed agreements"!

Worth the £1.00 fee!!!

They sent me an application form.......

Spoke to them yesterday, they are still looking for the agreement, they've had two weeks to find it........

birchave:)

 

How does this help us in any way?

[birchave0]

How does this help us in any way?

 

if there is no executed agreement then no agreement was ever made between the customer and marbles.

 

No agreement = no default charges, APR, etc

 

If they cannot produce an agreement or any t + c, who is to say what the customer ever agreed to. Please remember that unless Marbles produce an agreement only a judge can enforce the debt attached to it.

 

Do you really think a judge will accept an application form with no perscribed terms, no cancellation details and no terms and conditions as an agreement that is supposed to be regulated by the CCA 1974?

 

I think they would be on very thin ice.................

[shane5408]

if there is no executed agreement then no agreement was ever made between the customer and marbles.

 

No agreement = no default charges, APR, etc

 

If they cannot produce an agreement or any t + c, who is to say what the customer ever agreed to. Please remember that unless Marbles produce an agreement only a judge can enforce the debt attached to it.

 

Do you really think a judge will accept an application form with no perscribed terms, no cancellation details and no terms and conditions as an agreement that is supposed to be regulated by the CCA 1974?

 

I think they would be on very thin ice.................

 

hi,

 

If there is no agreement at all then any court/judge is precluded from making an enforcement order making the debt irredeemably unenforcable

 

regards,

shane

[birchave0]

hi,

 

If there is no agreement at all then any court/judge is precluded from making an enforcement order making the debt irredeemably unenforcable

 

regards,

shane

 

exactly!

 

why stop at the charges?

[caro]

exactly!

 

why stop at the charges?

 

Because the rest is presumably money that OP has spent and owes to Marbles. CAG do not condone debt evasion.

 

If there is a default, this can be tackled along with the charges.

[birchave0]

Because the rest is presumably money that OP has spent and owes to Marbles. CAG do not condone debt evasion.

 

If there is a default, this can be tackled along with the charges.

 

I am not advising anyone to avoid a debt......

 

but I'm sure if everything was worked out on a spread sheet the original amount borrowed has already been repaid, what is left is usually the interest applied to the account contractually plus charges.......

[tifo]

i have a big issue with Marbles re settlement in full some years ago with an amount and the rest written off.

 

now that i am claiming charges they are also claiming the written off amount as still due and the FOS agress with them and has paid them that amount from my refund and compensation, leaving me with nothing.

 

how can non production of a valid agreeement help me here as i want to get all charges back plus compensation for a unlawful default but both bank and FOS are on the same side here in a decision which is biased against me.

[shane5408]

I am not advising anyone to avoid a debt......

 

but I'm sure if everything was worked out on a spread sheet the original amount borrowed has already been repaid, what is left is usually the interest applied to the account contractually plus charges.......

 

 

Hi,

 

You can, infact I have on many occassions claim back penalty charges with the Contractual Rate of Interest applied it, I have no issue with ithis, at the end of the day that interest rate is what the creditor applied in the first place, you are simply claiming it back.

 

Claiming back all monies ever paid under an agreement is another matter, recent case law in the Wilson case the judge ruled that would be unjust enrichment on the debtors part which is why it will almost never stand up in court.

 

regards

shane

[caro]

In fairness if you'd already had an amount written off, it seems reasonable that any charges you claim back should offset that amount. The interest on the account is lawful, except for the interest on the charges. Did you ask for default removal when you made your claim. Was the default for more or less than your charges?

[birchave0]

i have a big issue with Marbles re settlement in full some years ago with an amount and the rest written off.

 

now that i am claiming charges they are also claiming the written off amount as still due and the FOS agress with them and has paid them that amount from my refund and compensation, leaving me with nothing.

 

how can non production of a valid agreeement help me here as i want to get all charges back plus compensation for a unlawful default but both bank and FOS are on the same side here in a decision which is biased against me.

 

sorry I thought this was perryclans thread......

 

but if you take them to court to claim your charges back no agreement is just that, no agreement.....

It therefore means you agreed to NO TERMS OR CONDITIONS whatsoever with Marbles.

 

So unless they can prove that you agreed to anything including sharing your data with a third party your defence is you also never agreed to their default charges. It's vey simple really.

[shane5408]

It's not quite that simple, if your argument is that no agreement exists, your are in effect voiding the agreement, or lacktherof entirely, which means the debtor and creditor will be put back in the same situation they were in immediately before the agreement was deemed to have started, meaning no charges, no interest, no anything ever took place.

 

this is why any claim for restitution cannot be made in conjunction with claim for penalty charges

 

 

regards,

shane

[tifo]

It's not quite that simple, if your argument is that no agreement exists, your are in effect voiding the agreement, or lacktherof entirely, which means the debtor and creditor will be put back in the same situation they were in immediately before the agreement was deemed to have started, meaning no charges, no interest, no anything ever took place.

 

But if someone has paid all the charges it means they would not be able to claim them back? For example, i paid off my whole balance in full years ago but now find it included £1200 of charges, what do i do?

 

so a s.78 non compliance only works for people who owe the bank money but don't need to claim anything back?

[tifo]

In fairness if you'd already had an amount written off, it seems reasonable that any charges you claim back should offset that amount. The interest on the account is lawful, except for the interest on the charges. Did you ask for default removal when you made your claim. Was the default for more or less than your charges?

 

To me it seems unfair. The bank accepted an amount which might or might not be the full amount, as that makes no difference but the fact that it was all agreed.

 

If i had paid 100% then everyone would say i am entitled to a refund of all charges plus interest on top. Just because the bank agreed to accept a lower amount in place of 100% which included charges it suddenly becomes wrong to claim anything back.

 

had the bank taken the charges off and agreed a settlement on the remaining amount then i agree it would be wrong for me to claim these back again but if they made me pay a settlement on the whole amount with charges then i see nothing wrong and it is as if i had paid all of it.

[shane5408]

But if someone has paid all the charges it means they would not be able to claim them back? For example, i paid off my whole balance in full years ago but now find it included £1200 of charges, what do i do?

 

I was referring to a situation which birchave propounded in arguing the agreement was never made and subsequently voided.

 

If you have had penalty charges debited from your account then yes ofcourse you can reclaim them but in your situation was the amount written off higher than the amount of charges? If so then you have gottten a better deal than you think as the normal situation woukd be to remove the charges figure from the balance, you would then be liable to clear the remaning balance.

 

so a s.78 non compliance only works for people who owe the bank money but don't need to claim anything back?

 

what do mean by non compliance here? a CCA request under s77-79 of the Act is only valid of there is a monetrary sum owed to the creditor in question, if not you need to send a S.A.R - (Subject Access Request).

[caro]

If you've paid the charges, you can claim them back, whether you still have an account or not, but you must have had more than just charges written off in your case, or the FOS would have made sure you had any extra back.

[tifo]

sorry I thought this was perryclans thread

 

sorry, i ask because it concerns Marbles.

 

i have my own thread on the issue ... tifo vs Marbles

[caro]

I'll move the posts on your claim to your thread tifo.