Gladstone Brookes fees

2»

Comments

  • In June last year I had my first PPI success due to thsi site but since then it has been a battle with the other three (Co-OP, MINT and particularly MBNA). The Co-Op paid up a few weeks back but the other two were with the FOS. I had a letter in mid July from the FOS stating MINT would pay up - but still nothing from MINT confirming exactly how much.

    The FOS upheld my complaint against MBNA but the rejected it. In July it went to an ombudsman and today the FOS said MBNA would pay up!!

    HURRAY!!! 4 out of 4, just need the dosh now but it may take until Christmas but HOORAY and thanks to all on this site.

    Never give up. At times I almost gave up but I knew I was right as when I was made redundant last year they wouldn't pay out as I was ineligable for the policies.

    Great news. I will never, ever get another credit card.

    For the first time in a decade I won't be weighed down with this rubbish but am free.

    I can never than you guys enough.
  • Yorik
    Yorik Posts: 10 Forumite
    Yorik wrote: »
    Hi,

    Just wondering what your thoughts are on my letter to Gladstone Brookes Ltd - whom I deem to have failed me in their contractual agreement and have rescinded the contract as such. No doubt they will try to hang on using whatever legal jargon etc. Your views would be greatly appreciated.

    Termination of contract between G Es & Gladstone Brookes Ltd – XXXXX-1


    Further to my telephone conversation of Friday 09 September with Mr (removed)I am rescinding my contract with immediate effect.
    Despite a telephone conversation with one of your colleagues on the 31 August informing him that:
    (a) No reply had been heard from Lloyds TSB and that they were not working in line with the requirements set out by the FSA and the time line of 31 Aug.
    (b) The fact that the above mentioned colleague did not ring me back on Friday 02 September as promised with an explanation.
    Because of the reasons above I deem that you have broken the terms of any contract that may have existed between us by failing to take any pro active action necessary, as clearly stated in earlier correspondence, to further my claim, even after being informed by myself via the above mentioned telephone conversation.
    I reserve my right to withdraw from the contract at any time. And I would further ask that any charges to me shall be limited to what is deemed reasonable in the circumstances and shall reflect work undertaken up to the 09 Sept by your business.
    I would request that you supply me with written evidence / copies of any contact made by you on my behalf with Lloyds TSB, including times and dates of any telephone conversations.
    I will at the same time be requesting my contact at Lloyds TSB to confirm the above, as it was made very clear during my last verbal conversation on Friday 09 September that no such contact has been made by you or logged in relation to resolving my claim, and to this date I have still not received a final response letter.
    I further request that due to the contract being rescinded that you no longer have my consent to act on my behalf, and as such will have no further contact with Lloyds TSB regarding this matter.

    Despite the above email being replied to by a representitive of Gladstone Brookes within the 5 days as set out in their Complaints proceedure I have not yet received any more communication by email in writing or verbally.
    Would I now class this as closed? Their complaints proceedures state that I would receive an answer within 4 weeks. I have heard nothing at all.
    I now believe that this contract is finally null and void - due to the fact GB have said or offered anything in their defence.
  • Gladstone Brookes have just been hauled up by the Advertising Standards Agency - see here.

    If you believe one of the claims deemed by the ASA to be misleading caused you to use Gladstone Brookes and that otherwise you would have dealt with the complaint yourself then you have grounds for complaining against them.
  • It would be rather fitting if the ruling prompted a flood of complaints and people seeking redress from claims companies.

    Perhaps one of the banks could produce a template letter :D
  • tifo
    tifo Posts: 2,098 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    This thread and many others like it are becoming a trend ...

    People use a claims management company because they cannot (or don't want to) do the claim themselves. When successful they don't want to pay the fee because they say it was 'easy' for the company.

    I have never used such a company because I don't want to pay their fees. Why don't others do this also?

    Complaining about fees for not doing much is not a valid reason. People don't complain about solicitor fees because they also don't *seem* to do much work for what they charge. In any case, if they did, the regulator would say they're 'reasonable' and reflect the 'market rate'.

    Another shining example is banks which charge a 'service' fee of between £5-£35 for declining an overdraft request. They don't seem to do much but the court still held it's fair.
  • dunstonh
    dunstonh Posts: 119,210 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Maybe the banks should set up claims companies to complain against claims companies.

    It was interesting that it was RBS in particular that raised the complaint with the ASA
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
  • tifo
    tifo Posts: 2,098 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    dunstonh wrote: »
    It was interesting that it was RBS in particular that raised the complaint with the ASA

    Yes, but in a way the advert is correct.

    People have 6 years within which to raise a claim because the banks apply this limitation to most claims.

    It's a bit rich when RBS complains about a company asking people to claim within the 'limited' time of 6 years whilst it itself applies this 'limited' time to most claims, as most banks do.
  • DrSqueeze wrote: »
    It would be rather fitting if the ruling prompted a flood of complaints and people seeking redress from claims companies.

    Perhaps one of the banks could produce a template letter

    I have put a template letter here.
    dunstonh wrote: »
    Maybe the banks should set up claims companies to complain against claims companies.

    Ooh wouldn't that be a satisfying job!
    It was interesting that it was RBS in particular that raised the complaint with the ASA

    Whenever I get a complaint in from an ambulance chaser I look to see if I can force a complaint at the ASA.
  • I have put a template letter here.
    Excellent :beer::T
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 349.9K Banking & Borrowing
  • 252.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453K Spending & Discounts
  • 242.9K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 619.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 176.4K Life & Family
  • 255.8K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.