We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Santander worst by far
Options
ryanclaremont
Posts: 2 Newbie
Hi - My wife has just had a default removed from her previous Santander account, this process took many months and went through the FSO to resolve. However, in my opinion there's still a lot of un-answered points. I've prepared this letter, mainly for the attention of the Santander.
Does anyone know, who to address it to, in order to get the biggest impact. Thanks
I write with reference to a default notice imposed on me by the Santander UK plc in September 2007. The default notice has recently been removed via the intervention of the Ombudsman; however, grievances and flaws in the 'system' still remain.
The Santander illegitimately imposed a default notice to my name in September 2007. This default notice was applied because, JW was the sole recipient of all correspondents and account access for the Santander current account 0000000, sort code 000000, at a time when I was divorced from JW and had no contact with him. I use the word illegitimately, because the Judge set a court order dated 28 February 2006 which indemnified me in item 'G' and specifically stated that my name should be removed from this joint account by JW, within 14 days of the court order being issued.
I believe the Judge knew that the 'system' was disingenuous and did not advise me that a process was not in existence to implement the terms specified within his court order; this missing process would have guaranteed my integrity and protected me against the resulting actions of the Santander. The court hearing and subsequent court order was, in essence, a sham, to all intents and purposes following procedure for the sake of it. The Judge knew that my future, in particular my financial reputation would not be determined by his hearing, or the court order, but in reality by the actions of Mr JW, I should not have subjected me to this disingenuous process. Clearly, it would seem a huge disconnect exists between the court order issued by the Judge and the net result all actions taken.
JW's failure to follow the concise court order, ultimately caused the Santander to apply the default notice to my name, his nonchalant, do nothing approach left me raped of my financial free will from September 2007 until June 2011, when the default notice was removed. JW's inability to follow the court order requirements laid out by the Judge, left me with a scar much deeper than anything he administered throughout our marriage. JW's decision not to adhere to the court order further endorses my belief, that the court order is in fact a facade, not worth the paper it is written on, because there is no tangible framework available to ensure the court order is fully implemented. Nethertheless, JW breached the terms of the court order, which was unfair to me and meant I, was treated worse than him. I say worse than him, because his subsequent actions after the court order was issued still influenced my life in a detrimental and negative way, JW knowingly had control over my future financial liberty in a way I did not. JW had sole access to all joint named correspondents and accounts, which means he had control, this is not only unjust, but also immoral and surely against all the principles of a divorce hearing and court order. Instead of being cut free from JW, his hatful regime of physical violence and invective behaviour, I continued to suffer beyond the termination of our marriage in a manner more malicious than ever before. As a small woman I could not have risked or coped with confronting JW about the actions he had taken from the court order. I had already endured enough punishment, which felt like a lifetimes worth, throughout our marriage, I should not have had to anyway; I had followed procedure in the appropriate way. I believe JW revelled in this new found influence and dictation of our joint financial affairs and my future financial prosperity.
The Santander's decision to apply a default notice to my name I believe was not only unlawful; it demonstrated a blatant disregard to the Judge's court order. JW had complete control over all correspondents and retained exclusive access to all joint accounts. I did not receive or review any correspondence from the Santander regarding the account, nor the decision to apply the default notice. Applying the default notice to my name, without my knowledge is unreasonable, morally wrong and most certainly against the implied duty of good faith. The solicitor sent a letter to JW following the divorce hearing, this letter affirmed that JW must remove my name from all joint accounts within 14 days, in accordance with item "g", which indemnified me in respect of all actions, claims and demands set out in the court order dated 28 February 2006. I had no reason to believe these actions had not been completed in full by JW, as I did not receive any form of correspondent from the Santander to say otherwise. Indeed, it meant the Santander was showing a preference to JW, they were treating him in a better way to me, showing him more respect and keeping him in the loop. JW had the opportunity to do the right thing, whilst I was denied that right. It seems I was treated like a pariah, not being privy to any correspondent or decision from the Santander.
I wrote to the Santander on four occasions during 2010 in my letters dated 8 / 23 April 2010, 16 / 20 May 2010. I gave the Santander a fair opportunity to remove the default notice from my name, even though the Santander had not been fair to me. I even offered to repay the outstanding default amount of £1643.28, as a gesture of good will, in return for the immediate removal of the default notice. However, this genuine offer was not even acknowledged from my letter dated 8 April 2001, nor my reiteration of the offer in my letter dated 23 April 2011 to JE and again in my letter dated 16 May 2010 to JE and NI. JW's capacity and aspiration to repay the default was unknown, whereas my offer was firm and available with immediate effect, however, the Santander's refusal to recognise or accept my proposal meant the Santander would potentially never recoup the monies owed. Every response received from that Santander was minimalistic, it seemed they were happy to do nothing more than send back a modified standard letter, instead of addressing the core issue. I requested a meeting with J E and her management team in my letter dated 23 April 2010, however, this request was never acknowledged. I do not know why the Santander were being so stubborn and unfair, when I was trying to be reasonable and pragmatic, even after they had treated me worse than JW. It would appear the Santander value my reputation less than JW's, and as a result my credit worthiness has been damaged beyond repair. I have suffered an unquantifiable level of financial hardship, as a result of the actions the Santander took against me, without my knowledge or consent. I have been refused credit, loans and most recently, in 2010 a joint mortgage application to the Cheltenham & Gloucester with my new husband. This mortgage rejection forced my husband into taking a mortgage with the Halifax at a worse rate of interest than that offered by the Cheltenham & Gloucester. Recently, the Halifax has shown compassion for my predicament, unlike the Santander, and allowed me to join my husband on that mortgage; this process alone has caused me to incur solicitor fees of £600.
There are only two conclusions that can be drawn, firstly, the Santander recognised they were in the wrong and decided to adopt a deliberate policy to uphold the default no matter what, and in spite of all logic and valid argument, which should have made this policy seem ludicrous. Or perhaps, secondly, they decided to treat me worse than JW because of my sex. Whatever the reason, I have had to stomach this wrongdoing until only recently, when the Ombudsman decided in my favour and instructed the Santander to remove the default notice from my credit record and compensate me with £500.
The Santander had no right to treat me in this way. I have not seen any plausible evidence from the Santander to vindicate themselves of their actions, and because of this I see no reason why I should not consider proceedings against JE, NI and DG, whom all had the opportunity in 2010 to remove the default notice and treat me in a fair way, like the Santander had treated JW. I also request the name of the individual, who decided to impose the default notice in September 2007 and all internal documents from the Santander which relate to the default being imposed.
Unfortunately, I do not feel that I am able to give a free and full and open account. However, what I can say is, the Solicitor was copiously aware of JW's invective and threatening manner, making any form of contact with him would have jeopardised my safety. I did not have the expectation of ending up with a default notice against my name, after paying over £7000 in fees.
My grievances can be summarised as follows:
The Judge for not advising me that a robust process did not exist to fully implement the terms set out in his court order. In the absence of this process, for whatever reason, the Judge should have advised me that we were merely following procedure for the sake of it, and the court order meant nothing if those individuals that were requested to take action from the court order, invariably did nothing.
JW for failing to take the appropriate action of removing my name from the Santander current account 00000000, sort code 000000 as specified in the Judge's court order.
The Santander, for unlawfully imposing the default notice to my name in September 2007, their deliberate policy of upholding the default notice no matter what, acting unreasonably in light of my proactive endeavour to resolve the issue, being unfair to me and treating me worse than JW, possibly because I am a woman.
I sincerely believe that I have been the casualty in this debacle and the Santander, above all should take the responsibility for this unlawful activity, they imposed the default notice and they only removed it when instructed to by the Ombudsman. They would not listen to my reasonable argument and they ignored the Judges court order. Not only has my financial reputation been destroyed, but my character and self esteem has also suffered, the Santander has caused me heartache in way that I did not deserve. I would be willing to meet with the Santander, so they could explain their actions and discuss an appropriate compensation arrangement, I say appropriate compensation arrangement because my calculations indicate that I have endured associated financial detriment in the region £9500 because of the Santander. I make this offer in spite of the fact the Santander has treated me in such a terrible way.
I would like to thank the Ombudsman for their professionalism in dealing with my complaint against the Santander, I can only imagine the considerable effort invloved and thank them wholeheartedly for their endeavour.
Does anyone know, who to address it to, in order to get the biggest impact. Thanks
I write with reference to a default notice imposed on me by the Santander UK plc in September 2007. The default notice has recently been removed via the intervention of the Ombudsman; however, grievances and flaws in the 'system' still remain.
The Santander illegitimately imposed a default notice to my name in September 2007. This default notice was applied because, JW was the sole recipient of all correspondents and account access for the Santander current account 0000000, sort code 000000, at a time when I was divorced from JW and had no contact with him. I use the word illegitimately, because the Judge set a court order dated 28 February 2006 which indemnified me in item 'G' and specifically stated that my name should be removed from this joint account by JW, within 14 days of the court order being issued.
I believe the Judge knew that the 'system' was disingenuous and did not advise me that a process was not in existence to implement the terms specified within his court order; this missing process would have guaranteed my integrity and protected me against the resulting actions of the Santander. The court hearing and subsequent court order was, in essence, a sham, to all intents and purposes following procedure for the sake of it. The Judge knew that my future, in particular my financial reputation would not be determined by his hearing, or the court order, but in reality by the actions of Mr JW, I should not have subjected me to this disingenuous process. Clearly, it would seem a huge disconnect exists between the court order issued by the Judge and the net result all actions taken.
JW's failure to follow the concise court order, ultimately caused the Santander to apply the default notice to my name, his nonchalant, do nothing approach left me raped of my financial free will from September 2007 until June 2011, when the default notice was removed. JW's inability to follow the court order requirements laid out by the Judge, left me with a scar much deeper than anything he administered throughout our marriage. JW's decision not to adhere to the court order further endorses my belief, that the court order is in fact a facade, not worth the paper it is written on, because there is no tangible framework available to ensure the court order is fully implemented. Nethertheless, JW breached the terms of the court order, which was unfair to me and meant I, was treated worse than him. I say worse than him, because his subsequent actions after the court order was issued still influenced my life in a detrimental and negative way, JW knowingly had control over my future financial liberty in a way I did not. JW had sole access to all joint named correspondents and accounts, which means he had control, this is not only unjust, but also immoral and surely against all the principles of a divorce hearing and court order. Instead of being cut free from JW, his hatful regime of physical violence and invective behaviour, I continued to suffer beyond the termination of our marriage in a manner more malicious than ever before. As a small woman I could not have risked or coped with confronting JW about the actions he had taken from the court order. I had already endured enough punishment, which felt like a lifetimes worth, throughout our marriage, I should not have had to anyway; I had followed procedure in the appropriate way. I believe JW revelled in this new found influence and dictation of our joint financial affairs and my future financial prosperity.
The Santander's decision to apply a default notice to my name I believe was not only unlawful; it demonstrated a blatant disregard to the Judge's court order. JW had complete control over all correspondents and retained exclusive access to all joint accounts. I did not receive or review any correspondence from the Santander regarding the account, nor the decision to apply the default notice. Applying the default notice to my name, without my knowledge is unreasonable, morally wrong and most certainly against the implied duty of good faith. The solicitor sent a letter to JW following the divorce hearing, this letter affirmed that JW must remove my name from all joint accounts within 14 days, in accordance with item "g", which indemnified me in respect of all actions, claims and demands set out in the court order dated 28 February 2006. I had no reason to believe these actions had not been completed in full by JW, as I did not receive any form of correspondent from the Santander to say otherwise. Indeed, it meant the Santander was showing a preference to JW, they were treating him in a better way to me, showing him more respect and keeping him in the loop. JW had the opportunity to do the right thing, whilst I was denied that right. It seems I was treated like a pariah, not being privy to any correspondent or decision from the Santander.
I wrote to the Santander on four occasions during 2010 in my letters dated 8 / 23 April 2010, 16 / 20 May 2010. I gave the Santander a fair opportunity to remove the default notice from my name, even though the Santander had not been fair to me. I even offered to repay the outstanding default amount of £1643.28, as a gesture of good will, in return for the immediate removal of the default notice. However, this genuine offer was not even acknowledged from my letter dated 8 April 2001, nor my reiteration of the offer in my letter dated 23 April 2011 to JE and again in my letter dated 16 May 2010 to JE and NI. JW's capacity and aspiration to repay the default was unknown, whereas my offer was firm and available with immediate effect, however, the Santander's refusal to recognise or accept my proposal meant the Santander would potentially never recoup the monies owed. Every response received from that Santander was minimalistic, it seemed they were happy to do nothing more than send back a modified standard letter, instead of addressing the core issue. I requested a meeting with J E and her management team in my letter dated 23 April 2010, however, this request was never acknowledged. I do not know why the Santander were being so stubborn and unfair, when I was trying to be reasonable and pragmatic, even after they had treated me worse than JW. It would appear the Santander value my reputation less than JW's, and as a result my credit worthiness has been damaged beyond repair. I have suffered an unquantifiable level of financial hardship, as a result of the actions the Santander took against me, without my knowledge or consent. I have been refused credit, loans and most recently, in 2010 a joint mortgage application to the Cheltenham & Gloucester with my new husband. This mortgage rejection forced my husband into taking a mortgage with the Halifax at a worse rate of interest than that offered by the Cheltenham & Gloucester. Recently, the Halifax has shown compassion for my predicament, unlike the Santander, and allowed me to join my husband on that mortgage; this process alone has caused me to incur solicitor fees of £600.
There are only two conclusions that can be drawn, firstly, the Santander recognised they were in the wrong and decided to adopt a deliberate policy to uphold the default no matter what, and in spite of all logic and valid argument, which should have made this policy seem ludicrous. Or perhaps, secondly, they decided to treat me worse than JW because of my sex. Whatever the reason, I have had to stomach this wrongdoing until only recently, when the Ombudsman decided in my favour and instructed the Santander to remove the default notice from my credit record and compensate me with £500.
The Santander had no right to treat me in this way. I have not seen any plausible evidence from the Santander to vindicate themselves of their actions, and because of this I see no reason why I should not consider proceedings against JE, NI and DG, whom all had the opportunity in 2010 to remove the default notice and treat me in a fair way, like the Santander had treated JW. I also request the name of the individual, who decided to impose the default notice in September 2007 and all internal documents from the Santander which relate to the default being imposed.
Unfortunately, I do not feel that I am able to give a free and full and open account. However, what I can say is, the Solicitor was copiously aware of JW's invective and threatening manner, making any form of contact with him would have jeopardised my safety. I did not have the expectation of ending up with a default notice against my name, after paying over £7000 in fees.
My grievances can be summarised as follows:
The Judge for not advising me that a robust process did not exist to fully implement the terms set out in his court order. In the absence of this process, for whatever reason, the Judge should have advised me that we were merely following procedure for the sake of it, and the court order meant nothing if those individuals that were requested to take action from the court order, invariably did nothing.
JW for failing to take the appropriate action of removing my name from the Santander current account 00000000, sort code 000000 as specified in the Judge's court order.
The Santander, for unlawfully imposing the default notice to my name in September 2007, their deliberate policy of upholding the default notice no matter what, acting unreasonably in light of my proactive endeavour to resolve the issue, being unfair to me and treating me worse than JW, possibly because I am a woman.
I sincerely believe that I have been the casualty in this debacle and the Santander, above all should take the responsibility for this unlawful activity, they imposed the default notice and they only removed it when instructed to by the Ombudsman. They would not listen to my reasonable argument and they ignored the Judges court order. Not only has my financial reputation been destroyed, but my character and self esteem has also suffered, the Santander has caused me heartache in way that I did not deserve. I would be willing to meet with the Santander, so they could explain their actions and discuss an appropriate compensation arrangement, I say appropriate compensation arrangement because my calculations indicate that I have endured associated financial detriment in the region £9500 because of the Santander. I make this offer in spite of the fact the Santander has treated me in such a terrible way.
I would like to thank the Ombudsman for their professionalism in dealing with my complaint against the Santander, I can only imagine the considerable effort invloved and thank them wholeheartedly for their endeavour.
0
Comments
-
Why are you bothering sending a ranty letter when the FOS has ruled in your favour and the matter is now closed?Anything I post is my opinion, so from time to time I may be wrong. I try to provide answers based in fact, however I don't know everything, so (like all posters on MSE), take what I say with a pinch of salt.0
-
-
Why are you bothering sending a ranty letter when the FOS has ruled in your favour and the matter is now closed?
Obviously, someone wants more than 500 quid in compensation.
ryanclaremont wrote: ».......when the Ombudsman decided in my favour and instructed the Santander to remove the default notice from my credit record and compensate me with £500.ryanclaremont wrote: »Not only has my financial reputation been destroyed, but my character and self esteem has also suffered, the Santander has caused me heartache in way that I did not deserve......discuss an appropriate compensation arrangement,....because my calculations indicate that I have endured associated financial detriment in the region £9500 because of the Santander.0 -
ryanclaremont wrote: »It's not ranty, pragmatic yes.
It is ranty. You spend more time discussing how aggrieved your wife is with her ex-husband, JW than Santander's faults.ryanclaremont wrote: »The reason is the system is broken and why should the Santander be able to treat someone in that way.
Santander are far more likely to listen to the FOS than a long winded letter from your wife. I can't see what you expect to gain by dragging this matter out? There is a lot of anger in that letter, but if you take a step back, and re-read, it is clearly more towards your wife's ex-husband and not Santander.
I don't want to open a can of worms, but why did your wife not present the court order directly to Santander and have her name removed that way? From reading the limited information you've provided, this seems like a simple and logical manner in which to draw the situation to a close much quicker (and perhaps could have avoided the default).Anything I post is my opinion, so from time to time I may be wrong. I try to provide answers based in fact, however I don't know everything, so (like all posters on MSE), take what I say with a pinch of salt.0 -
I think S will have a good laugh about that letter if they bother to read it.0
-
I think you need to rewrite the letter, removing all opinions and suggestions of that the judge 'knew' and was thinking. You should also remove all of the dramatic flourishes, eg
You should also address why you never returned to the court for the court to enforce its judgements.his nonchalant, do nothing approach left me raped of my financial free will from September 2007 until June 2011.0 -
I think you need to rewrite the letter, removing all opinions and suggestions of that the judge 'knew' and was thinking.
Why?
The OP's wife has followed a complaint through all the way to the FOS and won. Surely all the points raised have been covered off time and time again.
There is nothing to gain (aside from making a pest of themselves) in making another complaint on the same issue. I honestly can't see it being emotionally helpful to drag what is no doubt a painful ordeal for the OP's wife on any further.
If the OP was not happy with the FOS ruling they could have taken rejected their decision.Anything I post is my opinion, so from time to time I may be wrong. I try to provide answers based in fact, however I don't know everything, so (like all posters on MSE), take what I say with a pinch of salt.0 -
The OP asked for help with the letter. That's what I've offered. Although personally I agree with you, I'd let the matter drop now.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards