Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

It's more the complexity and trying to suit your response to what they are asking without giving away too much extra damaging info in the process - the fos are a pain in huge arse at the best of times and I don't presume for one minute they will be your saviour here but at least between us we'll get the best possible argument across allowing them the full opportunity to fuck it up all by themselves, as usual.

If they find against you then it's a dead end and shit, granted, but at least you can see you've had a few chances to add to your argument since you've stopped being so nice to the adjudicators, but let's see what it all does. I do hope they find in your favour but I've seen too many shocking decisions lately to have any faith, I'm sorry to say.

Lets hope for once they get it right eh?

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Thanks Niddy and I know exactly what you mean, its make or break now, but see what happens, will keep an open mind lol cheers.

Right below is a rough draft, not sure whether to add anything further or not?
thanks again.
.................................................. .................................................. ....................
(Rough draft) thanks Niddy.



For the attention of the Ombudsman


Complaint REF:

We enclose my comments in relation to the email sent by our Adjudicator Mr Carboo-Brown dated 12 March 2014.

We note the comments made by Lloyds clarify details of a Gold Service Account pre-1996 states it dropped from an income criteria of £20,000, as you are aware, Lloyds upgraded our account from Classic to a Gold Account in the year 2000, but if the above applies and was ongoing on the above income eligibility at the time the account was upgraded to us, then Lloyds should not have upgraded our account, as our joint Income at that time would not have reached even £20,000. However on previous information we provided to you we did state £6,000, but we are not sure of an accurate date it changed to this income criteria, could it be the date they have stated of 1998 as Lloyds have not clarified an Income drop on the year they applied the Gold Packaged Account to us.

It is the same for the follow-on accounts of Lloyds upgrading if they did come under the Income criteria as they stated, as its understood on research that Lloyds stopped taking into account the Income Criteria approximately 2008 onwards they then instead increased the monthly charges on all fee paid accounts for all customers.

The loan Rate for January 2001 was that of 14.00%, the same is shown on the Agreement document November 2001, as we understand Lloyds have been unable to trace the rate for the January 2001 loan, so we want to confirm this to you.

However, we explained on the letter dated November 2013 our circumstances, this included the benefits were not beneficial to us, and the reasons that apply. We also explained that as we needed a loan, no matter what rate applied and what account, we would have taken it anyway, preferential or not preferential, as you will be aware we had previous loans with Lloyds and loans taken out on all packaged accounts, but we do not believe all rates were preferential, especially a loan of 20.00% under a Premier account.

If you did not receive the letter that was meant to be forwarded to you in November 2013 by Ms Jarrold, we will be happy to re-send this to you again.

If you do require further information in regards of all the above stated, please email me for as soon as possible.

We look forward to hearing from you in regards of this complaint.

Yours sincerely


Mr & Mrs

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Do you think that was okay to mention about the letter sent November 2013? (in case it wasnt forwarded)? I just wonder if it was or not, because its like being asked questions on the loans all over again, the rates etc? and reasons were given for this on that letter....

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Do you think they will ask for proof first before deciding on a decision?

I did say though on the letter if they require any proof please email. I will be disappointed if they made the decision to reject if I didnt get asked to send anything, not that it will make any difference to their decision but it would be different if they were asking Lloyds lol, and I noticed on the email as well, they didnt mention anything about me wanting more time to let them know if it was needed lol.....(we all know how it works by now)!

I don't know what you think of the above letter Niddy, but let me know when you have 5 mins if there is something you may think i should add, and Is this letter being too nice? lol.

Thanks.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

I'll look into this later - just got a few bits to sort out first.....

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

That's okay Niddy, only when you have spare mins, I know how it is so no worries, but appreciate it big time thanks.

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Nattie, came up with something earlier as well, which made me think (cheers to nattie as well lol), all because of a benefit of one account (so in my case maybe the 2 loans), this does not actually mean that we were in agreement to having the account, but did then believe we had to have the account, since the bank more or less did state this on raising this with them later on (after they applied the gold package account), as prior to that we held a classic account that we did end up paying monthly charges for at £8 per month, where the bank did state as well, we are paying the same on the gold account as the classic account, and that it was just standard procedure to upgrade!

But for the sake of the loans, it did not mean we benefitted the full package of the gold account!

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

This is interesting below, because I'm sure Lloyds gave another year for the launch of the Platinum account, well it seems they did bring this account in early March 2001 and not 2003.....oh and income of £35K

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/p...-platinum.html

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Ok Di rewrite your draft and email me a revised copy taking into account Natties comments etc as well please. I'll look at this tmw night.

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Okay Niddy, will do and will do this tomorrow now (Sunday), thanking you :-)

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

I shall be doing this today and get back to you on it later Niddy, thanks again!

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Niddy, check this below? thanks, change, add, delete etc, thank you :-)

.................................................. .................................................. ......

For the attention of the Ombudsman.

In response to your email dated 12 March 2014, we have applied our comments below for the Ombudsman, in regards of the comments made by Lloyds.

Lloyds have clarified Income details of the packaged accounts.
Firstly the pre-1996 would not have applied to us, as we then held a Classic Account until Lloyds upgraded our account to Gold Service Account in the year 2000.

We did not have a yearly set income each year but one of us working full time and the other a home-maker and also becoming unemployed in between, In regards of the Platinum and Premier Income they were aimed for higher earners, and there is clarification on a link found on research called (The True Cost of Gold and Platinum) that confirms an income bracket of £6,000 for a Gold account, this was an article printed March 2001 where it also clarified that the Platinum was launched earlier that month in 2001. If the Income criteria was at £20,000 as Lloyds states prior to year 2000, then Lloyds should not have upgraded our account to Gold, as we did not meet that Income criteria. Lloyds have not made further comment of this.

We are confirming the rate of the January 2001 loan as shown on the Agreements was that of 14.00%, the same as the loan Agreement in November 2001, we note Lloyds are unable to provide you with these details because of the timescales.

In regards of the loan(s), as it appears that Lloyds are clarifying that we did benefit due to preferential rates, we would like to point out that just because of having one benefit does not mean that we did benefit from the full account package and this is not necessarily agreement to having the account, as we did clearly believe we had to have the account, as Lloyds upgraded this and not us.

As explained on our letter sent to you (passed on from Ms Jarrold) November/December 2013, we did not benefit from all the products and had appropriate cover already in place, one of those being a separate insurance with extended warranty with Lloyds TSB from the 90's to about 2003, then we taken out another stand alone insurance elsewhere in 2003 when we purchased our property through council right to buy. Other products were worthless and not beneficial for us, as we held no mobile phone, passport, did not travel and had pre existing health conditions, if this was discussed by Lloyds then at least we would have had the opportunity to have confirmed on this.

We would have taken out the loan's no matter what rate, as they were not discussed with us anyway, we were not aware if they were preferential or not.
We are not clear if we did actually receive that the discount rate was greater than the Branch Manager's Discretionary Discount (Powers), as we have taken out loans with Lloyds since having a classic account all the way to premier, where some rates do not appear to be preferential going by the most recent loans taken out. Being naive a loan was a loan etc....

As you will be aware we also fell into financial difficulties, and some of the packaged accounts were upgraded when we were already in a high amount of overdraft, in this case we would not have had the benefit for example: Premier Account of £500 interest fee Overdraft and the same for previous packages, there were excess charges applied on top of the monthly repayment of the account.

Please also refer to our letter dated November 2013 and consider all our comments and circumstances of our case.

Please email me if further information of the above is required and if you require us to forward you the letter you should have received November/December 2001. I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely


Mr & Mrs

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Since my above updated draft letter Niddy, Nattie made further comments, that I have also emailed you with to see what you think as well, then I can mayb add them in the letter too.. cheers.

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

3rd updated draft Niddy with some info added from Tim who suggested to add those comments as on earlier email to you, is it okay? lol thanks.
:-)

.................................................. .................................................. ......

For the attention of the Ombudsman.


In response to your email dated 12 March 2014, we have applied our comments below for the Ombudsman, in regards of the comments made by Lloyds.


Lloyds have clarified Income details of the packaged accounts.
Firstly the pre-1996 would not have applied to us, as we then held a Classic Account until Lloyds upgraded our account to Gold Service Account in the year 2000.


We did not have a yearly set income each year but one of us working full time and the other a home-maker and also becoming unemployed in between, In regards of the Platinum and Premier Income they were aimed for higher earners, and there is clarification on a link found on research called (The True Cost of Gold and Platinum) that confirms an income bracket of £6,000 for a Gold account, this was an article printed March 2001 where it also clarified that the Platinum was launched earlier that month in 2001. If the Income criteria was at £20,000 as Lloyds states prior to year 2000, then Lloyds should not have upgraded our account to Gold, as we did not meet that Income criteria. Lloyds have not made further comment of this.


We are confirming the rate of the January 2001 loan as shown on the Agreements was that of 14.00%, the same as the loan Agreement in November 2001, we note Lloyds are unable to provide you with these details because of the timescales.


In regards of the loan(s), as it appears that Lloyds are clarifying that we did benefit due to preferential rates, we would like to point out that just because of having one benefit does not mean that we did benefit from the full account package and this is not necessarily agreement to having the account, as we did clearly believe we had to have the account, as Lloyds upgraded this and not us.


As explained on our letter sent to you (passed on from Ms Jarrold) November/December 2013, we did not benefit from all the products and had appropriate cover already in place, one of those being a separate insurance with extended warranty with Lloyds TSB from the 90's to about 2003, then we taken out another stand alone insurance elsewhere in 2003 when we purchased our property through council right to buy. Other products were worthless and not beneficial for us, as we held no mobile phone, passport, did not travel and had pre existing health conditions, if this was discussed by Lloyds then at least we would have had the opportunity to have confirmed on this.

As already having extended insurance warranty cover in place with Lloyds TSB, this gave double coverage, as the Gold Account effectively doubled the cover despite of being unaware of it, therefore limited the benefit of the loans because we had paid extra amounts where we didn't need to.

This would bring it to the equation that the account benefits were never discussed property, nor reviewed during loans taken out with the account packages leading to potential mismanagement of accounts.


We would have taken out the loan's no matter what rate, as they were not discussed with us anyway, we were not aware if they were preferential or not.

We are not clear if we did actually receive that the discount rate was greater than the Branch Manager's Discretionary Discount (Powers), as we have taken out loans with Lloyds since having a classic account all the way to premier, where some rates do not appear to be preferential going by the most recent loans taken out. Being naive a loan was a loan etc....


As you will be aware we also fell into financial difficulties, and some of the packaged accounts were upgraded when we were already in a high amount of overdraft, in this case we would not have had the benefit for example: Premier Account of £500 interest fee Overdraft and the same for previous packages, there were excess charges applied on top of the monthly repayment of the account.


Please also refer to our letter dated November 2013 and consider all our comments and circumstances of our case.


Please email me if further information of the above is required and if you require us to forward you the letter you should have received November/December 2001. I look forward to hearing from you.


Yours sincerely



Mr & Mrs

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

LOL the bottom paragraph was mean to be 2013 not 2001 on the ombudsman receiving the letter lol.