By

Lloyds Banking Group responds to FOS complaints update – Lloyds Banking Group plc

IMG_8975 (800x600)The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) has today confirmed that over the last year, it has seen a 52% reduction in complaints received from customers of Lloyds Banking Group, with a 27% drop in the last six months alone. The figures show that complaints to the Ombudsman relating to the Group’s brands are falling at a faster rate than any other major bank.

The data published today also shows that, excluding complaints relating to PPI, 70 per cent of the Group’s decisions are upheld when they are referred to FOS. The Group continues to make significant progress on this measure, up from 55 per cent in 2010.

In addition, the FOS has today confirmed that in complaints relating to Investments and Pensions, it agrees with more decisions made by Lloyds Banking Group than any other major bank.

via Lloyds Banking Group responds to FOS complaints update – Lloyds Banking Group plc.

By

BBC News – Payday loan hardship cases up 42%, says StepChange charity

IMG_9012

 

The number of people struggling with payday loans has risen by 42% in the past year, according to a debt charity.The charity StepChange is asking the City regulator to take further action to protect consumers who suffer from such financial hardship.It said the Financial Conduct Authority FCA should impose an even stricter cap on payday loan costs.The FCA said it would study the idea, along with all the other responses to its current consultation.StepChange’s latest figures suggest the number of people getting into difficulty as a result of payday loans is continuing to increase.In the first half of 2014 it dealt with 43,716 consumers who were in trouble. That compares with 30,762 in the same period last year.

via BBC News – Payday loan hardship cases up 42%, says StepChange charity.

By

Autotrader phishing attempt and fraudulent website

Fraudulent Website

Please be aware of text messages or emails being sent to you asking you to pay a deposit in order to secure the sale of your vehicle. They will say this is to secure an appointment to take advantage of this offer.

The website customers are being asked to visit is www.autotrader.agency

This is not a genuine offer, and this website is in no way affiliated with Auto Trader.

If you have sent a deposit please contact Action Fraud immediately on 0300 123 2040 www.actionfraud.police.uk

If you have any concerns you can contact our Customer Security Team on 0330 303 9001 or e mail us at customersecurity@autotrader.co.uk

A phishing email may look like it has come from Auto Trader and will ask you to confirm your login details via a link in an email. The link will take you to a fraudulent website page which will look like the Auto Trader website. If you enter your login information, a fraudster has access to your online accounts.

via Important Security Announcement Please Read.

By

Enforcing financial ombudsman decisions | Feature | Law Society Gazette

Why are attempts to enforce Financial Ombudsman Service decisions in the legal system so onerous?

A number of new clients I have dealt with in recent times have brought to me, quite a peculiar conundrum – attempts to enforce Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) decisions in a legal system, where the clients, and even the courts, are not quite sure of where they stand.

First, to give some context, the FOS is a body which is supposed to be a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and take strain off the civil justice system being a simple and informal alternative for consumers. The FOS can award up to £150,000 in any one case that involves a regulated financial adviser. Section 228(5) Financial Services & Markets Act 2000 (FSMA) states that FOS decisions are ‘final and binding’ i.e. once they are in effect, they are there to stay.

via Enforcing financial ombudsman decisions | Feature | Law Society Gazette.

Read More

By

You’ve got absoutely nothing out of this – Nearly Legal: Housing Law News and Comment

In The Co-Operative Bank Plc v Philips [2014] EWHC 2862 Ch, Mr Philips was the owner of two residential premises both of which were the subject of mortgages in favour of Barclays Bank. He subsequently granted a further two second charges in favour of the Co-Operative Bank “the Bank” after it lent a company, of which Mr Philips was a director, a large sum of money. It was a term of the loan and the second charges that the amounts were due on demand. It was also a further term of the charge that “all costs charges and expenses incurred by the Bank and all other monies paid by the Bank in connection with the charge or the charged property were recoverable from Mr Phillips and/or the company as a debt and were to be charged on the charged property.”

via You’ve got absoutely nothing out of this – Nearly Legal: Housing Law News and Comment.