Completely annoyed with Barclays this is a joke!!!!

dunstonh

What a mess. The OP has posted so much conflicting information and is using inaccurate timescales that do not apply.

yetty123

Because it has been going on for such a long time there will be alot of confusion as I am not able to write every single detail down.

I am not confused and know exactly what I have and have not been told so thank you to everyone who has helped much appreciated I will just sit back and wait now and probably just keep my opinions to myself instead of coming on here to receive abuse.

yetty123

roonaldo wrote: »

Right, so if your complaint is at FOS, none of this 16 week stuff applies, as thats for pre- FOS complaints.

Are you saying that FOS have upheld and Barclays have not responded? if so its likely that barclays have disagreed it will go to an ombudsman for a final decision.

Thats what I mean which is why I was so annoyed in my first post, the 16 week timeframe should not apply to me so when I called the FOS yesterday and they said it did it really upset me

src007

I've read over what you said I agree with you. You're annoyed because Barclays wrote to you saying that they would respond by 31st August and they haven't.

Even if its at FOS Barclays still have to issue a final response by that date because they placed the complaint 'on hold'.

(Add your own sarcastic voice here) Maybe you should have sat an IFA exam, read and memorised by heart all the hundreds of FSA + FOS rules before making the complaint.

Then you wouldn't be a ''fool''. :rotfl:

yetty123

src007 wrote: »

I've read over what you said I agree with you. You're annoyed because Barclays wrote to you saying that they would respond by 31st August and they haven't.

Even if its at FOS Barclays still have to issue a final response by that date because they placed the complaint 'on hold'.

(Add your own sarcastic voice here) Maybe you should have sat an IFA exam, read and memorised by heart all the hundreds of FSA + FOS rules before making the complaint.

Then you wouldn't be a ''fool''. :rotfl:

Exactly :rotfl::rotfl:

magpiecottage

src007 wrote: »

Maybe you should have sat an IFA exam, read and memorised by heart all the hundreds of FSA + FOS rules before making the complaint.
Then you wouldn't be a ''fool''.

Wrong - there is no folly in ignorance per se (we all have to learn).

However, wasting the time of those attempting to help you at no cost and of their own volition by not giving them an accurate picture and contradictory information, then antagonising them by telling them they are wrong because they did not take account of something you didn't bother to tell them is hardly sensible behaviour.

My clients pay for my time which will tend to focus their minds but, if not then I am being paid to waste it so if they want to that is their prerogative. The OP is not paying and so my posts have are worth no less than they have cost him.

magpiecottage

Schroom wrote: »

Hi, I'm new to this, but can anyone help me.!!!
Been trying to claim missold PPI with HSBC for some time. Despite sending letters and making calls, I am getting nowhere.
My loan has now ended and the latest defence to their argument is that they no longer have the paperwork but are trying to arrange a scanned copy which they have on their computer that may be available to me.! f not, then I am out of luck and cannot make a claim.
Any suggestions as to what I can do next who be greatly appreciated.!

After reading other posts, it appears that its a long and hard process. I can see why their tactics put people off making a claim, but I'm currently on maternity leave and the extra money would be great now, so I need to keep on at them.
Any help or suggestions anyone can give me would be much appreciated.

You have hijacked somebody else's thread, could you start your own please.

src007

magpiecottage wrote: »

However, wasting the time of those attempting to help you at no cost and of their own volition by not giving them an accurate picture and contradictory information, then antagonising them by telling them they are wrong because they did not take account of something you didn't bother to tell them is hardly sensible behaviour.

Why would anyone deliberately give contradictory information to waste peoples time?

Yetty123 was only responding to posts that were clearly wrong and insulting!

dunstonh wrote: »

As it stands, Barclays have broken no rules on the complaints process. So, whilst it may be frustrating for you, there is little point getting angry.

Whilst you and dunstonh often provide very good information, I agree with Yetty123 on this one. I can see no ''time wasting'' just some understandable confusion.

Barclays have broken no rules?

So they offered a good product did they? Or did they knowingly recommend a terrible product for their own profit?

Did they deal with the complaint in 8 weeks from September? (as the rules clearly state they should?) Or did they knowingly ignore this rule?

Did they apply for a waiver of complaint handling rules through the courts (as the rules clearly state they should) or did they knowingly ignore this rule?

Did they explain why this complaint specifically should be placed on hold as a result of the Judicial Review? (or did they knowingly keep the customer in the dark so this couldn’t be challenged, giving a general template response with absolutely no explanation of why this complaint was ''on hold''?)

Did the FSA ask the banks to deal with ALL 'on hold' complaints (with figures) by 31st August? (it looks like this one was missed).

Did Barclays PROMISE that they would resolve ALL complaints by 31st August (WITH FIGURES and payment) or not? Or have they missed this deadline, in this case?

Barclays have messed around with this complaint. If someone offers to pay you by a certain date and they don’t, anyone would be angry! I see no ''pointless rant''.

Yetti123's instincts are actually closer to the mark than the people trying to ‘‘help’’ on this thread.

So, Barclays have broken no rules? Apart from acting unethically at the sale, illegally placing it 'on hold', underhandedly by not explaining why it’s on hold, breaking their promise to deal with it by 31st August and breaking the rules by not issuing a final response by 31st August? Ok, apart from that, no rule breaches. :rotfl:

yetty123

src007 wrote: »

Why would anyone deliberately give contradictory information to waste peoples time?

Yetty123 was only responding to posts that were clearly wrong and insulting!



Whilst you and dunstonh often provide very good information, I agree with Yetty123 on this one. I can see no ''time wasting'' just some understandable confusion.

Barclays have broken no rules?

So they offered a good product did they? Or did they knowingly recommend a terrible product for their own profit?[/
COLOR]

Well said

Did they deal with the complaint in 8 weeks from September? (as the rules clearly state they should?) Or did they knowingly ignore this rule?

Did they apply for a waiver of complaint handling rules through the courts (as the rules clearly state they should) or did they knowingly ignore this rule?

Did they explain why this complaint specifically should be placed on hold as a result of the Judicial Review? (or did they knowingly keep the customer in the dark so this couldn’t be challenged, giving a general template response with absolutely no explanation of why this complaint was ''on hold''?)

Did the FSA ask the banks to deal with ALL 'on hold' complaints (with figures) by 31st August? (it looks like this one was missed).

Did Barclays PROMISE that they would resolve ALL complaints by 31st August (WITH FIGURES and payment) or not? Or have they missed this deadline, in this case?

Barclays have messed around with this complaint. If someone offers to pay you by a certain date and they don’t, anyone would be angry! I see no ''pointless rant''.

Yetti123's instincts are actually closer to the mark than the people trying to ‘‘help’’ on this thread.

So, Barclays have broken no rules? Apart from acting unethically at the sale, illegally placing it 'on hold', underhandedly by not explaining why it’s on hold, breaking their promise to deal with it by 31st August and breaking the rules by not issuing a final response by 31st August? Ok, apart from that, no rule breaches. :rotfl:

:A

:rotfl:Well said src007 magpiecottage has been so insulting and im sure this kind of behaviour is not permitted on here. i have had people private messaging me about how unacceptable this is never mind im glad there are some really nice people out there thanks again scr007 for your kind input much appreciated

roonaldo

chill out all, its sunday.