Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

[MattyA]

Re: Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

What do you think of the two senarios ?

It makes a huge difference as you can see.

This particular argument is with another bank who like all others have been very reluctant to settle this in a fair and rasonable manner , even though they have told the FOS they have done so.

To date they have credited out of the blue, half the amount I believe to be due and have refused to provide any breakdowns of how they have arrived at the figure despite my requesting this information on numerous occassions, their latest tack has been to refuse my SAR request due to the account being closed - by them.

I now have a complaint registered with head office for what it is worth.

[ken100464]

Re: Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

I wrote to MBNA and demanded the calculations as FOS deem this reasonable.

I gave them 4 weeks to comply or I would ask FOS to intervene.

Guess what the calculations arrived 2 days before my deadline.

[ken100464]

Re: Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

There is only one spreadsheet.

The one I see isnt one I am familiar with so being late at night and am unsure what you are comparing it with I would hate to say x y and Z.

For me I think a bank will run rings round Joe Punter with how much interest was due on which month,

For me its about keep on referring them and eventually FOS to what they say they following.

If they and in my case they have said fcuk you we do as we please then any complaint to the FSA is strengthened.

And thats what I am doing. Forget the £5iver get the actual method being ruled as wrong first. But quote what is out there on the web back at everyone.

No good publishing it then doing as they please. Journo will be well pleased if they carry on and alot of people will be embarrassed.

[ken100464]

Re: Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

Matt.

Very interested on your post on another forum.

Its a very good thread to follow but now I have someone here who actually seems to get it then happy to bounce what we find off each other if you happy with that.

Totally agree with the Press thing and like the steps you have or are taking to push them into the position that they could well regret.

Thats why I am doing it the way I am and trying to get MP involved. FSA would be no good if its just one of us but if more and more are working out these guys are having the public over again after they have been caught with the fingers in the till the better.

If you have a firm who are interested and think they can get the barstewards to cough I am interested in that.

I have a well documented case. Its with FOS now but like you think it will be way too complicated for minimum wage boy ( No offence but how can young low wage adjudicators get what the banks have been really up to )

This isnt a one off that they made a mistake this is systemic manipulation to reduce the cost of the blatant miss-sales.

And it wouldnt surprise me if the sudden rush to Dickie Branson again is the looming realisation thet they are starting to get chatter that Joe Public is starting to finger their collar again and therefore before long the regulators will start to show an interest in their practices.

Anyway on that thread you will see a couple of those spreadsheets you want. They wiggle at first but if you named them they cant really say they dont have the internal document.

[MattyA]

Re: Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

Hi Ken,

I am up for a bit / lot of a battle......I have many hundreds of documents created over the past couple years and reams of information in return from the banks.

I have been fighting since 2010 and am not about to give up any time soon.

Solicitor wise I have tried a coule - 1 via the other site and he proved to be a bit pf a BSer / didnt really know how to compute tghe figure und one via this site who proved their worth and solve a case that had been going on for some time.

I will be happy to bounce ideas of you etc.....

But for now I am knackered and need my bed.


Matty

[ken100464]

Re: Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

I have thought about this alot today and pulled out my final go to FOS letter again.

Not good as the arrogance will probably cause me to blow a gasket.

They are writing to two audiences which is interesting.

They are telling me to go blow myself on one hand but then there is this paragraph which is interesting.

"The calculations we followed was specifically designed to ensure that you were put back into the position you would have been in had PPI never been added to your account. We did this by working out how your balance over time would have changed if you had made the same monthly payments without PPI"

Thats a good paragraph in a letter if FOS or FSA get hold of it.

But what they dont say is that overlimits that were charged have not been removed once the reconstructed balance falls below the card limit. How can an overlimit of £25 stand when the limit was breached by £3 but by this time I had paid over £900 in PPI. Its not possible for me to have even remotely breached my limit.

They are not saying we remove PPI and associated interest at our whim from the reconstructed balance and therefore the recon balance is higher than it should be.

This higher balance will attract contractual interest some of which will be due to PPI. To remove it all from contractual the recon balance must be allowed to have all this PPI removed therefore being lower therefore attracting LESS contractual.

This could actually make the recon balance go into credit. If it does this is when 8% interest should be paid. Not throughout the life of the account because they want to remove it from the recon balance.

Nor do they say that when the actual balance is paid off all PPI and associated interest is removed and the recon balance reset to the actual balance. Therefore again the recon balance is higher than it should be and therefore an element of contractual interest will accrue due to PPI not being taken out of the balance.

That letter and in particular that paragraph is aimed not at me but at minimum wage boy.

[ken100464]

Re: Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

Hi Ken,

I am up for a bit / lot of a battle......I have many hundreds of documents created over the past couple years and reams of information in return from the banks.

I have been fighting since 2010 and am not about to give up any time soon.

Solicitor wise I have tried a coule - 1 via the other site and he proved to be a bit pf a BSer / didnt really know how to compute tghe figure und one via this site who proved their worth and solve a case that had been going on for some time.

I will be happy to bounce ideas of you etc.....

But for now I am knackered and need my bed.


Matty

Matty yep reckon will take a while but our two minds and with Turbo and Di aswell and your contacts with a legal firm who understand we could be getting somewhere.

I believe FOS will let us down. I have complained direct to FSA and have also spoken to my MP.

Hopefully we can grow an unholy alliance.

[di30]

Re: Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

So sorry I've not kept up, busy time lol , but will come back to this tomorrow (well later now), just came back from Asda, thank goodness they 24 hour, best time to go.

[MattyA]

Re: Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

I have thought about this alot today and pulled out my final go to FOS letter again.

Not good as the arrogance will probably cause me to blow a gasket.

They are writing to two audiences which is interesting.

They are telling me to go blow myself on one hand but then there is this paragraph which is interesting.

"The calculations we followed was specifically designed to ensure that you were put back into the position you would have been in had PPI never been added to your account. We did this by working out how your balance over time would have changed if you had made the same monthly payments without PPI"

Thats a good paragraph in a letter if FOS or FSA get hold of it.

But what they dont say is that overlimits that were charged have not been removed once the reconstructed balance falls below the card limit. How can an overlimit of £25 stand when the limit was breached by £3 but by this time I had paid over £900 in PPI. Its not possible for me to have even remotely breached my limit.

They are not saying we remove PPI and associated interest at our whim from the reconstructed balance and therefore the recon balance is higher than it should be.

This higher balance will attract contractual interest some of which will be due to PPI. To remove it all from contractual the recon balance must be allowed to have all this PPI removed therefore being lower therefore attracting LESS contractual.

This could actually make the recon balance go into credit. If it does this is when 8% interest should be paid. Not throughout the life of the account because they want to remove it from the recon balance.

Nor do they say that when the actual balance is paid off all PPI and associated interest is removed and the recon balance reset to the actual balance. Therefore again the recon balance is higher than it should be and therefore an element of contractual interest will accrue due to PPI not being taken out of the balance.

That letter and in particular that paragraph is aimed not at me but at minimum wage boy.

Spot on buddy - this is my argument exactley.

Now add another dimension to it.....

If the reconstruction of your account becomes positive & you get the 8% as you rightly say you would then be entitled to.....what about the payments you have made to service the debt?

Work it out - it will stun you.

I paid say £300 / month on an account to service the debt (inc PPI and assocaited interest) but despite the reconstruction showing the positive balance,assuming you didnt spend anything due to being maxed out, the redress offered will total less than the payments made to service the debt.

Completely wrong & the banks win again.

Hope this makes sense and explains my argument.

No solicitor has got their head around this / challenged this yet.......it is massive.



Regards all,

Matty

[ken100464]

Re: Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

Question is why isnt anyone else really grasping this and in particular why isnt the regulators and Ombudsman picking it up.

Your last bit I havnt really thought about.

Would the reconstructed balance if premiums and contractual interest are applied not deal with this?

Or are you saying if the reconstructed goes into credit what about all the other payments that wouldnt have been made? Wouldnt the payments just increase the credit balance which would then accrue more 8%

This one is throwing me somewhat? Or the debt that doesnt exist is actually increasing by contractual when infact it isnt there so shouldnt be increasing at all?

[MattyA]

Re: Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

'Or are you saying if the reconstructed goes into credit what about all the other payments that wouldnt have been made? Wouldnt the payments just increase the credit balance which would then accrue more 8%

This one is throwing me somewhat? Or the debt that doesnt exist is actually increasing by contractual when infact it isnt there so shouldnt be increasing at all? '

This is the point - amd I really dont know why it is being picked up.

I think it just hasnt been thought about / is too complicated for the FOS?

If you have a spreadsheet amd the account is a long standing one it is worth a look.

Matty

[MattyA]

Re: Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

I will post my alculations again if it helps - just look at the last bit.

Matty

[MattyA]

Re: Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

AAD Redress calculations example.xls

[ken100464]

Re: Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

I would have to sit down and have a look at the numbers as the spreadsheet isnt one I am familiar with.

Couple of things that I cant follow as I am unfamiliar with it is that the Running PPI should be the sum of the previous running PPI balance plus that months premium + interest? Look at month Aug and Sept 05 Not sure what happens here as the figure starts to rocket but the figures are not enough to bring this about.

Plus towards the end there seems to have been some event where PPI drops to virtually nothing or nothing? Also right at end actual balance doesnt alter. Almost as if you had an account freeze. Nothing in or out?

If you have an interest freeze contractual stops. FSA/FOS say interest arising from the PPI. If they aint applying interest I think you would be hard pressed to claim it???

And this is the problem with all this in my mind. Any spreadsheet I have people could pick holes in it just as MBNA could.

Whereas my thought is you just keep referring everyone to the FSA/FOS examples. Eventually hopefully someone will see they are being disingenous with the calculations and order a new set.

Another problem we have is our spreadsheets work monthly or with just one interest rate or various other limiters.

I can tell you MBNA's spreadsheet is calculating with daily interest. Our spreadsheets are not this sophisticated.

Therefore we are defending our figures before we even start to pull them to bits.

But going back to your initial thought not sure that if the balance was frozen which your spreadsheet seems to suggest then I am unsure any contractual was being added???? If nothing was being added then unsure how you can claim this element back?

[ken100464]

Re: Reference Information for Calculating Actual Redress

Of course I may be barking and not seeing the wood for the trees but that was the initial thoughts late on in the night.

Maybe Turboman could scan his eyes over and see what he thinks? With this I think the more people looking at it the better the answer will be.