FSA regulated irresponsible lending & a ccj

potatoefeet66

Angry_Cat wrote: »

Could you please actually explain what your complaint is and what is the out come your are looking for, as your posts don't make a lot of sense.

If sounds like you applied and got a self cert, you did some work on the property and increased its value and then you tried to remortgage, I can only guess for a higher amount, based upon the increased value of the property and you were turned down as you could not afford it.

I was trying to reduce the existing balance by a simultaneous lump sum reduction upon porting. i had 142k outstanding in feb 09 wanted to reduce this by using equity up by up to 82K.

I have said I would post the responses I get back from lender as they happen.

From Privacy & Data Protection.
Dear Mr......
We have conducted a preliminary search of our systems but unfortunately have been unable to locate evidence of this document.
I am sorry we have been unable to help on this occasion. LI have returned your cheQue for £10 with this letter.
Yours sincerely
Manager

So the saga goes on, Im awaiting the ICO investigation into Fraud and data breach.

potatoefeet66

_Andy_ wrote: »

Why are you guys just feeding the OP?

because this is great britain and not china.....x

ponbeam

Forgive me for asking but which part was the "Data Breach"?

Wutang_2

ponbeam wrote: »

Forgive me for asking but which part was the "Data Breach"?

Nooooooooooooooooooooo!!! 23 people have already took their own lives reading this maniac's ramblings. Please, spare the bloodshed. For the love of god

potatoefeet66

ponbeam wrote: »

Forgive me for asking but which part was the "Data Breach"?

lender disclosed false and untrue information to a third party.
It terns out they claimed the conducted a full mortgage application on 5th Feb and searched credit file but with out permission. In fact they did not conduct a full search for a application for credit this would have left a hard foot print on file. It was as it transpires only at AIP stage.

Full searches must be documented and if soft search is done it must be recorded as full credit search when a full application for credit is conducted. That is ICO rules and FSA rules.

Fact lender never carried out any legitimate full application as they stated and then during AIP stage decided to terminate after issuing KFI further discussion on reduced figure, has breached FSA and ICO processes.

holly_hobby

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

lender disclosed false and untrue information to a third party.

Not from what you've said.

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

It terns out they claimed the conducted a full mortgage application on 5th Feb and searched credit file but with out permission.

They told you they conducted a search without your authority, or they didn't have a signed mge application giving your authority ?

Nevertheless you confusingly contradict this by saying ...

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

In fact they did not conduct a full search for a application for credit this would have left a hard foot print on file. It was as it transpires only at AIP stage.

Now thats completely correct, an AIP is not a CRA search, so does not leave a footprint - it is conducted under a Public Domain Data search, which will reveal VR, CCJ and BO info ... if the AIP is successful you then go through to full application, whereby a FULL CRA search (with resulting footprint as discussed) is conducted and recorded ( a full CRA search provides amongst other things, a full payment profile, creditor and conduct search of the subject).

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

Full searches must be documented and if soft search is done it must be recorded as full credit search when a full application for credit is conducted. That is ICO rules and FSA rules.

Yes thats correct, fact of the matter here though, is that your application did not proceed past AIP stage, so therefore no CRA search was required, conducted or recorded .... so there is no breach of any cited regs.

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

Fact lender never carried out any legitimate full application as they stated and then during AIP stage decided to terminate after issuing KFI further discussion on reduced figure, has breached FSA and ICO processes.

KFI is no indication of a future mge offer (as you have been told several times)
AIP is not a full application, it is a prequel if you like.
The lender does not have to proceed to full application, they do not have to lend to you, you do not have to remain with them, do not pass go !!

You are going on and on about things, and trying to cite wrong or mis-doings by the lender, on elements that you evidently don't understand or have first hand experience of the processes involved.

It stands out that this has become a simply (unfounded) witch hunt by you, in retribution for the lender refusing to offer you a new mortgage arrangement ....... and that is how FOS, and the Courts will see it.

Please, for the sake of your own sanity, put this to bed, you will gain nothing from it, certainly no compensation if that is the driving factor, there is no evidence of wrong doing - simply a business decsion by a lender, and maybe a bit of mis-communication or understanding between you and the in branch adviser - nothing more ...

Now, I know that you will respond to this post, with just a re-hash and repost of breaches of this and that - which you of course may do .... but no matter how many times you repeat this (even if you genuinely believe it), or try and conjour up various conspiricy theory's re the lender and how their sole aim was not to lend to you .... it doesn't make it true, or that any laws or regulations have been broken, OR alter the fact that this whole "complaint" you are trying to give legs, is largely coming across that you have a persecution and desire for retribution complex.

Note to the board ... sorry guys I know I shouldn't encourage this, but just wanted to comment on the above post by the OP.

Holly

Thrugelmir

holly_hobby wrote: »

Note to the board ... sorry guys I know I shouldn't encourage this, but just wanted to comment on the above post by the OP.

Holly

Your contribution to the board will result in a Sainthood one day.......:cool:

holly_hobby

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Your contribution to the board will result in a Sainthood one day.......:cool:

:A .. and you T x

St Holly .... must say does have a nice ring to it

H xxxx

potatoefeet66

Look I don't think like you say there is any point in continuing the post here. I am not on a witch hunt or anything else.

By the way i have received an offer of compensation, but until this matter is correctly investigated thats what it will stay just an offer i returned the payment.

So don't lose any sleep over it. cheers.

holly_hobby

potatoefeet66 wrote: »

By the way i have received an offer of compensation, but until this matter is correctly investigated thats what it will stay just an offer i returned the payment.

That will be discretionary D&I and NOT a compensation payment - as we already know the bank have rejected your complaint. (incidently the offer of a D&I payment, will have been completely withdrawn following your rejection of their defence and escalation to FOS some 3 yrs ago).

I'm sorry that you weren't happy with my post, but there really is no need to be churlish, simply because you don't accept the points and factual issues to the story and claim discussed.

No doubt though you'll keep on ploddin' with this .... dog bone and all that ....

Wish you well in any event ......

Holly