PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

LinF_3

tiggrae wrote: »

absolutely not - Royal Bank of Scotland have a good reputation as a bank and tend to deal with people fairer than others - they don't wont this tarnished by these little offshoots which they probably inherited when buying another business ( a bit like barclays inheriting First Plus when they bought Woolwich in 1997(?) - they've been trying to get shut of them ever since. Whenever I make a claim against either lombard I always put Royal Bank of Scotland (trading as Lombard) or First plus - barclay (trading as first plus)

the banks also seem to have more respect for the Financial Ombudsman and the Financial services authority than the smaller, stand alone companies who will fight any decision by the FOS to the n'th degree

So there is still hope for me yet?? Thanks for explaining that.

tiggrae

LinF wrote: »

So there is still hope for me yet?? Thanks for explaining that.

don't wont to give you any false hope here as the decisions of the Adjudicator will be made on the evidence presented to him on a case by case basis - the problem you're having is faced by most people in that the FOS is absolutely inundated with claims and they simply can't deal with the volume being received - the bottle neck apparently was the allocation to the adjudicators but apparently they've just taken on another 20 so hopefully that will help clear the back log - just so you know I've claims outstanding from January of this year so you're not alone !!!!

di3004

Timed out here just now and had to restart the computer again.....:mad:
is that what happened to you too Marshallka ?
It happened to me when I tried posting......:rolleyes:

di3004

Although I emailed the letter into the OFT today, the hardcopy should be with them tomorrow too with a bit of luck......:D .

Been to see the parents and not actually got round to starting the FSA letter yet, so will do this fresh tomorrow now.;)

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

Timed out here just now and had to restart the computer again.....:mad:
is that what happened to you too Marshallka ?
It happened to me when I tried posting......:rolleyes:

Its doing my head in. I actually pm'd MARTIN himself yesterday as I did not see the email for technical problems at the top. He got back this morning and said they were trying on it.:eek:
Re: re site slow
It isnt working as smoothly as it should - we're trying

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

Its doing my head in. I actually pm'd MARTIN himself yesterday as I did not see the email for technical problems at the top. He got back this morning and said they were trying on it.:eek:
Re: re site slow
It isnt working as smoothly as it should - we're trying

Good for you hun.;)
Have you noticed its only now its speeding up again ?:rolleyes:

Editing back in:::
Well apart from the posting side of it, better than what it was but still not quick enough !!!

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

Good for you hun.;)
Have you noticed its only now its speeding up again ?:rolleyes:

Editing back in:::
Well apart from the posting side of it, better than what it was but still not quick enough !!!

Yeah, it was great again just refreshing and then posting takes ages

di3004

Wonder what will become of the toothpaste clang ? lol......:D
I think you may get my drift here lol.........:rotfl:

marshallka

marshallka wrote: »

WHY HAVE A DORMANT COMPANY?

Companies can be dormant for various reasons, often to protect a company name, in readiness for a future project, or to hold an asset or intellectual property. Some flat management companies whose main purpose is to own the head lease or the freehold of a property choose to become dormant by setting up a residents' association to deal with any expenses. A company can remain dormant for as long as necessary - indefinitely if, for example, its purpose it just to prevent the name being used by another company.


Does this bare resemblance to any company you know!!!!!!

Di, did you see this. Its like click did here. It was to protect the name and also there ready and waiting for a new licence me thinks.

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

Yeah, it was great again just refreshing and then posting takes ages

Its very frustrating isn't it ?:mad:
Wonder if its anything to do with this site being soooooo busy with all these ppi complaints ? lol.....:D