Dot ComUnity Credit Union - ISA

gwapenut

masonic wrote:

Therefore I believe that ECBU had no legal basis to offer these accounts in the first place

If you are correct then we have much firmer grounds for complaint and, i guess, for consequential losses to be made good.

colsten

gwapenut wrote: »

If you are correct then we have much firmer grounds for complaint and, i guess, for consequential losses to be made good.

We've got a cast iron case regardless IMO. The ones that haven't got a leg to stand on (literally!) are EBCU.

MARTYM8` wrote: »

I think this is perhaps the saddest thing about all this - putting aside our money - as this credit union primarily exists to support people with physical and learning disabilities and their carers.

Existing borrowers needn't be affected if EBCU go into administration - they can pay back their loans as per the existing agreements to the administrators who can then feed money back to the FSCS. New borrowers can be served by a credit union that actually knows what they are doing. The EBCU business model is clearly a dog's breakfast as it has collapsed for the second time, and I would be surprised if the FCA would give them a 3rd chance. Mind you, apparently pigs do fly sometimes.

masonic

gwapenut wrote: »

If you are correct then we have much firmer grounds for complaint and, i guess, for consequential losses to be made good.

It probably isn't helpful to include those sorts of things in a formal complaint that will initially be judged by the credit union and ultimately by an FOS adjudicator or ombudsman.

Complaints will be judged on the grounds of whether the customer was treated fairly. Effective complaints centre around issues such as whether any of the agreed T&Cs for the account were broken by the company, and whether the customer was always given clear information, was kept appropriately informed and was not misled. Other grounds for complaint would be that the product does not perform as the company has led them to expect, or if the customer faces unreasonable barriers to exit the contract.

I think people's experiences as detailed here would allow them to use most, if not all, of those grounds for complaint. I agree with colsten - there is no doubt complaints must be upheld.

gwapenut

One nasty thought - if dcu were not allowed to take in isa money for interest rather than dividends, then is that isa money still entitled to fscs protection?

EDIT. Well, even if not, we'd still have a case against the regulators, who maintained ebcu as an authorised isa deposit taker just a few months ago.

masonic

FSCS protection covers you against wrongdoing by the company holding the deposits, so if they are on the register and say your money is protected, it is protected.

MARTYM8`

masonic wrote: »

FSCS protection covers you against wrongdoing by the company holding the deposits, so if they are on the register and say your money is protected, it is protected.

Yes - their maturity letter (assuming you get one - as some people maturing on 5 May still haven't had theirs it seems) states very clearly in bold:

Your ISA investment will remain fully protected by the FSCS scheme (https://www.fscs.org.uk).[/B

Just making that clear - in bold!

The letter also includes their PRA/FCA registration number at the bottom and makes clear it is coming from Enterprise the business credit union limited which is their official title.

PS Hope my post doesn't get deleted as I quoted directly from a DotCon letter.:D

Archi_Bald

The restriction notes have vanished from the FCA register in the last 24 hours (I have screenshots). It could just be a cruel system fault to raise our hopes but may be, just may be, the regulators are working over the weekend and are now satisfied with EBCU?

FOREVER21

Archi_Bald wrote: »

The restriction notes have vanished from the FCA register in the last 24 hours (I have screenshots). It could just be a cruel system fault to raise our hopes but may be, just may be, the regulators are working over the weekend and are now satisfied with EBCU?

I hope it has been cleared, but Civil Servants working over the weekend?


Unfortunately I had not managed to find the FCA restriction notes on the website when I tried, originally a month ago but there again I am new to this computer age and my learning curve is still at the starting point.


I rely on this thread to keep me updated.

darren72

It definitely looks promising.

The link I posted quite a few pages back was the one that showed the restrictions -

https://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/firmPermissions.do?sid=86924

This is no clear of any mention of these

Mr_Doubtfire

Bad news I'm afraid. The PRA have confirmed that the restrictions are still in place on DCU. Apparently there is a technical fault with the Financial Services Register which is causing the Deposit Taking Requirements notice not to be displayed on the FCA website. Looks like we're stuck on this ride for a while yet.