Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

[The Debt Star]

Re: Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

the only indication of PPI is in that initial letter from barclays, the first link in post #71. They say quite clearly it was sold.

the recon doesn't refer to it at all.

its a bit disapointing that the CCA satisfies s78 as it looks appalling imo but if it is then it is.

i will have to go back to the bank for clarification.

this does prove the point that recons are ridiculuous though and its amazing that the courts accept them given that the creditors can make up any bull**** they like.

[Bill-K]

Re: Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

As Ben says, there is no evidence in the agreement they sent which indicates that PPI was included - but, yes indeedy, the letter in post #71 clearly states that PPI WAS included. It justr doesn't state where or how.

From the agreement, it would seem that we have to deduce that the PPI was included in the "Total Charge for Credit" of £4356.00. The APR is also stated as being 10.9%.

I guess we need to run an amortisation calculation on the £15K advance, using an APR of 10.9%. This should show what the Total Amount Payable would have been if PPI had not been sold.
The difference between this and the original TAP of £19356 will be the total of PPI plus associated interest.

I think we should then be able to work out an 'apportionment factor' - which we then apply to the £322.60 monthly repayments to determine what portion of them was PPI. We can then add Statutory interest to that.

Can you do the amortisation, Turbo ? It's your forté, I believe...

[Turboman]

Re: Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

Bill--The letter states quite clearly the loan was £15,000 and the PPI premium was (ie opening balance -£15,000) in fact £4,356----

ie 23.43 % apportionment of the ACTUAL PAYMENTS made----not always the original monthly payment in this case

Bill---I thought we bottomed this one---just remains for me to correct the remaining loan balance which is 76.57% of the final closing balance on the SS DS sent us

I'll come back to this after tea and send you the revised ss DS

[Bill-K]

Re: Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

No - it states that the PPI brought the TAP up to £19356 - but NOT that it was £4356. The £4356 may be a combination of PPI and loan interest. In fact is HAS to be, IMO.

[Curlyben]

Re: Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

Whatever way to slice it there is NO mention of PPI on this piece of paper, which, IMHO, invalidates this as a response to an s77 request, especially in like of PT's recent judgements..

[Caspar]

Re: Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

the only indication of PPI is in that initial letter from barclays, the first link in post #71. They say quite clearly it was sold.

the recon doesn't refer to it at all.

its a bit disapointing that the CCA satisfies s78 as it looks appalling imo but if it is then it is.

this does prove the point that recons are ridiculuous though and its amazing that the courts accept them given that the creditors can make up any bull**** they like.

DS - had it not satisfied S77 was your intent to go the unenforcement route. I said on AAD I thought it was enforceable, against common consensus. However, haave you thought that if there is still any chance of you wanting to take the unenforceability route, starting to reclaim any ppi will surely be acknowledging the agreement and might backfoot you.

Are institutions allowed to reconstitute an agreement more than once? -ie- could they add ppi now?

[Turboman]

Re: Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

No - it states that the PPI brought the TAP up to £19,356 - but NOT that it was £4356. The £4356 may be a combination of PPI and loan interest. In fact is HAS to be, IMO.

Hmmmmmmmmm --- there is a contradiction isn't there Bill

The first Photobucket item states that £4,356 was the PPI premium in a total OPENING BALANCE of £19,356

The second item is "reconstituted CCA" with TAP at £19,356 and of course 60 x £322.60 = £19,356 -- so yes I agree now Bill---that is the TAP on the 2nd exhibit----but its not usually shown like that----therefore there is some doubt whether the £4356 was in fact not PPI (some clerk wrote a crap letter) but merely interest

And having put £15,000 into Amortization Schedules at 10.9% it does in fact produce anticipated interest of around that sum Bill (within £150 as I aint got their METHOD of calculating interest)

S0000000000---I deduce the first letter (in Photobucket) is WRONG and PPI was in fact NEVER on this loan

Am I talking sense Bill?


BUT---on the SS DS sent us the opening balance is £19,356----Where did those Outanding Balance figures come from DS-an actual statement or your assumtions starting with an opening balance of £19,356?---I suspect its your assumtions---yes?

[Curlyben]

Re: Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

Psst fails under multi agreements

PPI and cash loans should be broken out.

Also where ae the COMPLETE T&C governing this agreement..

[Turboman]

Re: Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

I agree Curly --but summarsing for others as
we got 2 issues going on here in parallel



1---The existence or not of whether the PPI was in fact ever present----in spite of first exibit in post 71--- which I think is wrong & written incorrectly by someone getting total interest & PPI mixed up in thir head----which me & Bill are debating

2---The validity of the loan agreement being debated between Curly & DS---and what to do about it if it is not a valid CCA

[The Debt Star]

Re: Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

S0000000000---I deduce the first letter (in Photobucket) is WRONG and PPI was in fact NEVER on this loan

Right. When I got back from work tonite a letter from barclays was waiting for me. I quote:

"May I firstly apologise for the confusion my original resolution letter dated X January 2011 has caused.

"I can confirm there was no Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) policy taken with the original Masterloan. The difference in the balance of the loan quoted in my letter does not relate to the premium for a PPI policy.
"The difference actually relates to the interest which was applied immediatetly when the loan was drawn rather than periodically over the course of the loan. This was the practice at vthe time with this type of loan.

"...There is therefore no PPI issue regarding any possible mis-selling and the details received on the copy agreement are therefore accurate."

What a ball buster

Turbo, your mathematical genius had already figured this out before the boys from Barclays it seems. Well done.
A massive burger me having such false hope following the initial letter from the bank saying I'd been sold PPI. Remember, it goes back 8 years. I really thought the CCA was a cobbled up piece of rubbish and invalid for screening the PPI.

So, am I left with anything? CB says the terms are incomplete which is defo the case. On the CCA the bank have said:

"I will be required to refer your concerns to the Bank's legal Department before being able to provide a reply specific to this issue."

Can i say though - and this is a big tip for any readers complaining to barclays - that an email to the CEO Robert Diamond works wonders. Di30 kindly gave me his email address and once I sent that last week I got prompt and immediate responses from the bank - after months now of silence and incomplete replies. It worked wonders. So thank you to Bill-K, Turbo and Di30 in particular here.

Disapointing, yes, definitely, but the math gets it right every time and complaining at the highest possible level by email works.

on the SS DS sent us the opening balance is £19,356----Where did those Outanding Balance figures come from DS-an actual statement or your assumtions starting with an opening balance of £19,356?---I suspect its your assumtions---yes?

The data sent on my Excel spreadsheet was 100% accurate Turbs, even down to the dates payments were made. I sent that info rather than scan 6 pages of statements providing the same info. Took me about an hour to transfer that data to the Excel sheet. At the time of course I was riding high on the initial letter (the one I pasted on photobucket, relating to the PPI issue in hand) in which I was advised that over £4K was PPI.

[Curlyben]

Re: Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

So where's me coat ??

[The Debt Star]

Re: Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

My fault?!

[Turboman]

Re: Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

Ok Ds---Its a bugger DS

unusual loan in adding all interest up front by the way----soooooooooooo --- we need to now unravel that if either you settle loan or otherwise---as you are not expected to pay interest in the future if loan is cancelled/paid up or amended----but certainly not the big sums we thought we was going for re PPI--and in any case its only an adjustment of the outstanding balance mate

Sorry that things didn't work out-but Barclays got your hopes up with that erroneous letter saying you had PPI & then correcting it to say you hadn't

So----back to the issues re defaults/CRA's etc.... which is not my bag mate

[Bill-K]

Re: Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

Well, dammit....I guess we're all back to despondently kicking cans up and down the alleyway, now, then ?

Knowledge is built on this. Credit to Ben & Turbo for seeing what was coming. When sums don't add up, then logic doesn't stack up. We got Barclays to admit to ferkin' up. Red faces all round - but it was the Barclays Berkeley that ferked up in the first place, remember. That might be useful ammunition in the future - next time they try the dirty tricks.

But maybe they won't - thanks to Di's advice. Maybe this has got a silver lining. Maybe the next move that DS makes will be monitored by the CEO (I forgot his name, already - but I know it wasn't F. West)

If the figures that DS put into his spready were 100% accurately reproduced, then they were NOT a true statement of his account, IMHO. They don't add up. Fiction. NOT ICO compliant, surely ?

So - I guess we have a straw to grasp at - unenforceability, perhaps. Their general demeanour in dealing with DS seems despicable - but of course we need more than that. I'm not sure what weight a falsified Statement of Account would have - but to my mind a falsified statement is fraud.

Just rattling a sabre, though.

Ben....don't get your coat, yet. I would value your opinion - even if I don't like it.

[Turboman]

Re: Masterloan - Help & Advice Please

)

If the figures that DS put into his spready were 100% accurately reproduced, then they were NOT a true statement of his account, IMHO. They don't add up. Fiction. NOT ICO compliant, surely ?

.

Why do you think that Bill----DS faithfully transcribed from statement to SS and it looks ok to me---