Penalty charges site 'call for action' against influence of economic climate on Court

[Amethyst]

Re: Penalty charges site 'call for action' against influence of economic climate on C

lol well you know I'm picky...and fwiw I agree.

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Penalty charges site 'call for action' against influence of economic climate on C

The question I would say, is that another opportunity presents itself.
We cannot have an influence into a judicial decision re OFT test case.
As yesterdays Financial Hardship case has clearly shown, the OP in that case may lose their house as a result of the stay. How does he not class as hardship? How does an individual have to be on the brink of destitution(not saying they were) before something is done? I think pressure NEEDS to be exerted on the FSA. If consumer groups want to work together it should be on lobbying the FSA with constructive dialogue and NOT protesting about what has not happened, but ensure that failures can be addressed properly.
Letter writing may help but action needs to happen fast. My comment re other sites, is that it is difficult to sit around a table when there are other issues unresolved which involve CAG and LB(ok, I have said it). I cannot see why talks cannot take place between PC and all groups so that if necessary a common approach is made so that maybe groups do not necessarily have to stare at each other across a table but could stare across MSN.
Maybe CAG and LB could have someone unconnected directly as representatives who could liase with each others teams(just an idea). We will see.

[Amethyst]

edit - note to self: mmm maybe discuss first, post later..durrrr

[scoobydoo]

Re: Penalty charges site 'call for action' against influence of economic climate on C

NWSM

May I call you that?

I think in Jesters case especially it showed that perseverence can sometimes work . Perhaps attack from all sides is the right action. The Harship cases are being helped a little more but it is still too slow and only happening with those that are really pro-active. So if there is any extra pressure that could be applied maybe you are right.

[Amethyst]

Re: Penalty charges site 'call for action' against influence of economic climate on C

Needs an across the board policy that banks MUST adhere to. All the banks have different limits and identifications of hardship - though most seem to go with CFA.

Have any of the monthly reports figures from banks to the FSA waiver peeps been published? would they be subject to FOI ?

[EXC]

Re: Penalty charges site 'call for action' against influence of economic climate on C

You won't get any bank specific figures from the FSA. We could put in an updated request on the the ones below but frankly the numbers are so unbelievable, would we learn anything meaningful?



Ref: FOI0814

30 November 2007

Dear EXC
Freedom of Information: Right to know request
Thank you for your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act), for the following information in relation to the FSA's two month complaints handling waiver review:

"1) From the information supplied to you by the banks for consideration in the review, how
many complaints about unauthorised overdraft charges from customers claiming financial hardship have the banks received?

2) From the information supplied to you by the banks for consideration in the review, how
many customers making complaints have been identified by the banks as being cases of
financial hardship?

3) From the information supplied to you by the banks for consideration in the review, how
many identified cases of financial hardship have been offered a partial refund of charges
claimed?

4) From the information supplied to you by the banks for consideration in the review, how
many identified cases of financial hardship have been offered a full refund of charges
claimed?"

Your request has now been considered and I will respond to each point in order:

1) Whilst we did not ask for this information to be provided as part of the review, a small number of firms did provide an answer, the total being 525.
2) The total figure provided by the firms is 6,908.
In answer to 3) and 4), we do not hold the information separately for each point, however we do hold the aggregated figure for the data which is 1,195.

If you have any queries then please contact me.

Yours sincerely

R. Traynor

Information Access Team



Our Ref: FOI0914

13 May 2008

Dear EXC

Freedom of Information: Right to know request

Thank you for your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act), for the following information in relation to … an update of information you provided me in a FoIA request (FOI0814) on 30 November 2007…and… the financial hardship conditions that form the exemption from FSA's complaints handling waiver for banks:

1.To date, or from the latest date available, from the information supplied to you by the banks for consideration in the ongoing review, how many customers making complaints have been identified by the banks as being cases of financial hardship since the introduction of the waiver?

2.To date, or from the latest date available, from the information supplied to you by the banks for consideration in the ongoing review, how many identified cases of financial hardship have been offered a partial or full refund of charges claimed?

3.What criteria do the FSA and the banks use to define 'financial hardship'.

4.If the answer to question 3 is 'none', does the FSA consider it sufficiently robust to rely solely on the bank's integrity to define 'financial hardship' for the purposes of complying with what is the flagship 'consumer protection' element of the waiver's conditions?

5.Please supply me with a precise list of what financial hardship information and data was requested by the FSA from the banks for consideration of the ongoing review.

6.What procedures did the FSA undertake to verify the accuracy of the above data.

7.Please supply me with the FSA’s views/recommendations given to the Banking Code review on the subject of the bank’s handling of cases of financial hardship.
Your request has now been considered and I will respond to each point below. Please be aware that we have used the term ‘financial difficulty’ in place of ‘financial hardship’ as explained in our response to question 3:

• For the period ending 29 February 2008 (latest date available) all of the firms (that is, banks and building societies) who were granted the waiver, reported a total of 22,191 relevant charges complaints where financial difficulty has been claimed by the customer. The FSA has observed that claims made by customers to be in financial difficulty, were subject to an assessment by firms in conjunction with their own criteria for accepting financial difficulty.

• The FSA has asked several larger firms to provide information relating to how they have handled relevant charges complaints where financial difficulty had been accepted. Based on the data sample received from these firms in February 2008, we found that 64%[1] of relevant charges complainants, who were accepted as being in financial difficulty, received a refund offer.

• The term financial hardship is not defined by the FSA. However, financial difficulty is defined in the Guidance for subscribers to the Banking Code. A copy of the Code can be found on the Banking Code Standards Boards website, which is located at the following address: http://www.bankingcode.org.uk/thecodes.htm. The definition that the firms would be expected to be using when assessing cases of financial difficulty in relation to unauthorised overdraft charges complaints is outlined in paragraph 14 of the Code.

• See response to point 3 above.

5.The FSA has undertaken a joint review with the Banking Code Standards Board. We have asked firms to provide data on the:
· number of financial difficulty cases that have been identified within the relevant charges complaint population (see response to point 1 above);
· offers that have been made (see response to point 2 above); and


· processes used by firms to identify and handle complainants in financial difficulty.

• The FSA has undertaken a range of monitoring activities in its review of how firms meet the requirements set out in the waiver. On-site inspections have been undertaken to assess the reliability of the data received by the FSA. These on-site inspections have examined the effectiveness of the processes used by firms, including a review of individual complaints.

The Banking Code Standards Board has reviewed the compliance by firms with Banking Code requirements that relate to the handling of complainants in financial difficulty.

1. The FSA's submission to the review of the Banking Code was made in February 2007. Please note there are no references to the treatment of customers in financial difficulty. A link to the submission is given below.

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/other/banking_review07.pdf
If you have any queries then please contact me.
Yours sincerely

K. Edwards
Information Access

[Amethyst]

Re: Penalty charges site 'call for action' against influence of economic climate on C

Yes you are probably right, the rest of the info is corporate confidentiality etc I suppose.

Thanks for recalling this tho - might be useful to find figures - I did somewhere do the proportion of claimants who might be entitled to claim hardship..will see if i can find it.