Letter from the bank has been doctored!!

dynamic1

Hi,

I am looking for some advise as I am very concerned about the integrity of my bank.

To cut a long story short I am reclaiming mis-sold PPI.
I had contacted the bank by phone at the start of July explaining my case. Some weeks later I contacted the bank again as I did not receive a response. Again a number of weeks later nothing, so I wrote a letter detailing disappointment as they had not stuck to their 8 week deadline.

This is where it gets interesting.
I got a letter saying that they had responded on a particular date and enclosed a copy of the of the correspondence that they had sent out.
Anyway while going through my files I actually found the original letter that they had sent out.
I have found that they have deleted certain bullet points, added in paragraphs and deleted certain paragraphs.

I am really concerned as the two letters should be identical as one is a copy of the other.

Original Letter states uring their investigation into my claim I had received the key facts illustration, in the copy of the letter this has disappeared.
Original states during the investigation that I took my mortgage out on a particular date - (it was wrong by 2 years), in the copy the date has been deleted,
In the copy they have added another paragraph into the OPTIONALITY heading.

Any help would be appreciated

Kind regards
Dynamic1

-taff

They probably investigated it again, and sent you another letter.
You can always phone them and ask, but I think you're being a bit paranoid.

McKneff

Do both letters have exactly the same date on them and do they both have the same signators.

dynamic1

-taff wrote: »

They probably investigated it again, and sent you another letter.
You can always phone them and ask, but I think you're being a bit paranoid.

Well should they not have said please see enclosed our letter regarding our decision? Instead of saying "Further to your letter dated 15th October 2012, I have enclosed a copy of our correspondence dated 24th July"

dynamic1

McKneff wrote: »

Do both letters have exactly the same date on them and do they both have the same signators.

Both letters are from the same date with the same person that its from, the first one is signed, the copy is not signed. The cover letter that the copy was attached to is from another person and signed

-taff

photocopy both of them send them or take them to them, and ask them what's going on.

dynamic1

-taff wrote: »

photocopy both of them send them or take them to them, and ask them what's going on.

I've written a letter and it's going recorded delivery today.
They didn't think I had the original letter when I asked for a copy to be sent.

[Deleted User]

dynamic1 wrote: »

I've written a letter and it's going recorded delivery today.
They didn't think I had the original letter when I asked for a copy to be sent.

Seems perfectly obvious to me that your original letter was an unfinished version probably sent in haste, while the Bank's own copy was the completed version.

It's important to understand that this correspondence is made up of template forms which Bank staff can choose to add or subtract paragraphs to or from.

The only suspicious aspect of this is that you complained of not receiving anything and then suddenly produced the letter they had already told you they sent.

All you have done is uncovered some (slight) clerical incompetence, it's not going to mean your complaint will be re-considered. The two letters contain no contradictions of each other, so all you can expect is an explanation and an apology.

dynamic1

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

Seems perfectly obvious to me that your original letter was an unfinished version probably sent in haste, while the Bank's own copy was the completed version.

It's important to understand that this correspondence is made up of template forms which Bank staff can choose to add or subtract paragraphs to or from.

The only suspicious aspect of this is that you complained of not receiving anything and then suddenly produced the letter they had already told you they sent.

All you have done is uncovered some (slight) clerical incompetence, it's not going to mean your complaint will be re-considered. The two letters contain no contradictions of each other, so all you can expect is an explanation and an apology.

They do contradict in parts, first letter said one of the things that they took into consideration when making the decision was that I had received the key facts illustration, and in the 2nd letter this is taken out completely, this will be because I never received and was never shown this. So the only thing they are basing their decision on is their knowledge of their sales process at the time! Their processes don't fill me with confidence.

[Deleted User]

dynamic1 wrote: »

So the only thing they are basing their decision on is their knowledge of their sales process at the time!

Conversely, the only thing you were basing your complaint on is your memory of events which took place years ago.

"Hearsay" type complaints like yours are always responded to with reference to the sales scripts and processes which would have been used at the time. Did you think they would interview the member of staff who sold you the PPI?

They've rejected your complaint and sent you two (slightly) differing rejection letters. Remember, if you hadn't claimed that you didn't receive the original letter, you would never have received the second and so be able to compare the two!

Instead of wasting your time with this futile attempt at getting them to investigate a simple clerical error, I'd be wasting no time in referring the complaint itself to the Ombudsman.

As you've now confirmed that you did indeed receive the original letter in July, you've already lost three months of the six in which you are allowed to go to FOS.

The next stage of your complaint, if you still remain dissatisfied, is here;
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/ppi-loan-insurance#step4

dunstonh

The firm has a defined sales process. It will be assumed that the process was followed unless there is any evidence to the contrary.