jd2000

Nasqueron

brown1950 wrote: »

If the OP discovered 2 years ago the OP could complain about credit card charges then the OP has 4 years in which legal action can be taken.

Please stop spreading these myths, you cannot just declare a date of your choosing and say that was when you became aware, the regulators accept numerous things as proof a person knew they had reason to complain such as a statement from the lender with the charges listed. Using your logic you could just claim to have not known until today and start the clock then - this is not how it works as the FOS have confirmed in agreeing the time bar is valid.

Also it's 6 years from opening the account, 3 years from knowing you had an issue, you don't even know the rules you're trying to use!

jd2000

The question of "awareness" appears to be a matter of dispute. I should like to apply logic to the situation. If I, or anyone else, was aware that I could make a claim then why did I, or anyone else, not make a claim.I was not in possession of the information that would lead me to make a claim-ergo I was not aware.

jd2000

The rules state that, as regards awareness, that "three years from the date on which you became aware ( or ought reasonably to have been aware ) that you had cause for complaint". As i had no contact from M.B.N.A. since I paid off my account in 2004, namely no statements nor payments made by myself, my contact with them was non existant ( therefore no awareness ). I was not employed in financial services nor any employment akin to financial services and therefore not aware.You could apply the "reasonably to have been aware " to an accident. Should somebody be "reasonably aware "of an accident before it happens.The fact of the situation is that until the accident happens to yourself that is the time you become aware. At that point you have the information that makes you aware.

[Deleted User]

jd2000 wrote: »

The question of "awareness" appears to be a matter of dispute.

It's not us that you had to convince, though.

The Bank and the Ombudsman have already rejected your complaint.

Nasqueron

jd2000 wrote: »

The rules state that, as regards awareness, that "three years from the date on which you became aware ( or ought reasonably to have been aware ) that you had cause for complaint". As i had no contact from M.B.N.A. since I paid off my account in 2004, namely no statements nor payments made by myself, my contact with them was non existant ( therefore no awareness ). I was not employed in financial services nor any employment akin to financial services and therefore not aware.You could apply the "reasonably to have been aware " to an accident. Should somebody be "reasonably aware "of an accident before it happens.The fact of the situation is that until the accident happens to yourself that is the time you become aware. At that point you have the information that makes you aware.

It doesn't matter what definitions you want to come up with, the rules that cover the situation have been applied and you have been time barred. If you think about it, you could just claim to have no knowledge of the situation until today and demand they investigate which is clearly nonsense. Your statement from MNBA included the PPI charge every month making you aware of it. You closed your account which again is counted as being aware of it. You can argue here until you are blue in the face but it doesn't matter, the rules are set in stone and have been applied and the bank and regulator have confirmed you are out of time. If you get lucky Brown will come back and tell you all you need to do is take them to court and they will magically pay out (though he won't pay your costs even though he insists you can't lose). No-one on here has any reason to lie to you about the rules of the financial industry, note only one person claims you have a secret get out clause and he's well known for these claims on here