Removal of a default recently applied by HSBC

[not-impressed]

I am looking for advice on gaining the removal of a default recently applied by HSBC.

I'm new to this site and therefore have not previously followed any advice provided by this site.


I'm requesting the default be removed from my credit reports as I believe I have been unfairly treated and this default has not been applied correctly.


I believe HSBC has treated me unfairly as they refused to offer and agree a payment plan that their Final Demand letter offered, their communications, and application of process have contained many inaccuracies that have meant resolving the situation was confusing and difficult, and the detail of the registered default are inaccurate.


I have already raised this with the financial Ombudsman and they have upheld the decision by HSBC to refuse to remove the default (verbally stating I'd taken HSBC's correspondence 'too literally').


My next step is to challenge this decision by the Financial Ombudsman but I only have just over a week to do this (extended by a week from 13th August 2015).


I’d be very grateful for any advice on how to approach this and what else, if anything, I should be doing.


The background


I opened an account with HSBC in 1992.
I stopped using this account when I changed jobs a few years ago and opened a new account with a different bank which my salary is now paid into.


As the HSBC account no longer received my salary and direct debits were still set on the account (these are time consuming to set up again), the account went over the agreed overdraft on a couple of occasions due to my oversight in managing the balance and the numerous direct debits that were set up on the account.


As the account was effectively dormant, HSBC changed my account to a basic account and removed my formal overdraft in the months prior to issuing the Pre-Demand and Final Demand letters.


I made a number of payments to keep the overdraft at its limit but , largely due to the fees charged by HSBC, the account did go over its limit again and (I subsequently discovered) entered HSBC’s ‘collection process’.


Final Demand


The Final Demand letter I received in September 2014 stated "We recently issued you with a Default Notice on the above account." I have never received one nor has HSBC been able to provide evidence of ever having issued one.


Following receipt of the Final Demand notice I called to arrange repayment of approximately 50% of the outstanding sum with a suggestion of repaying the remaining balance but the agent I spoke to insisted that there was nothing I could do to arrange a repayment plan and I’d have to wait until I was contacted by HSBC Repayment Services (HRS).


HSBC did not make it clear on the call that transferal to HRS would result in a default being registered and that the only way to prevent a default from being registered was to pay the full debt at that time.


I consider that I was treated unfairly as the repeated offer in the letter to make suitable arrangements appears not to be genuine and as such, and for the purpose of clear communication, should not have been included in the letter.


HSBC also declined my request to clarify this by email following the call. I requested this as the advice given in the letter and the conversation differed so greatly and I was confused by the unclear explanation of the process.


The Final Demand letter stated


"If you do not make full payment or make a suitable arrangement with us..." and under the "help is available” section specified that “if you are unable to pay the full amount at this time, please call the above number and we will try to work with you to come to a suitable arrangement”


HSBC have subsequently responded to me to state that

“As the Final Demand had already been set, only repayment of the full outstanding balance would have prevented the account from being passed to HRS and a Default registered with the CRA's.”


I consider that I was treated unfairly as the repeated offer in the letter to make suitable arrangements appears not to be genuine and as such, and for the purpose of clear communication, should not have been included in the letter.

Inaccurate registration of Defaults


HSBC have subsequently registered a default with only 2 of the three CRA’s but did so approximately 4 months after they told me they’d closed the account and registered the default.


I’m not sure why the default was registered so long after HSBC say the account was closed and why the default has not been registered with all CRA’s.


Inaccuracies in registered default


Whilst I don’t believe a default should have been registered due to lack of Default Notice, the default that has been registered appears to be inaccurate based on HSBC’s stated aim of showing “a true reflection of how the account has been maintained"”.


The start balance has been registered as the default balance and the account was marked as satisfied about a week before the final repayment was made.


In addition to this HSBC had never registered anything with any credit reference agency before April 2015 (presumably because my account was opened in 1992 before they were obliged to share information with Credit Reference Agencies) and as the date of closure of the account didn't match the date of closure stated by HSBC as my account closure date I don't consider this statement to be accurate.


According to HSBC correspondence the closure date was in November 2014 but no default was registered until March 2015.


I spoke with Experian in January 2015 and they confirmed a default had not been registered and indeed no information had been received from HSBC at all.




This is after HSBC stated they had both closed my account and registered a default. This position only changed in my Experian credit file in April 2015.


The implication here is that I could have applied for credit for 4 months after HSBC claimed they’d registered a default without a default having any impact on my chances to get a mortgage etc.


In addition to this inaccuracy, the final sentence of the last paragraph of the first page of HSBC's letter of was incomplete and simply stated "This is reported for 6 years although”.


Response from HSBC to my initial appeal


I’ve written a couple of letters to HSBC raising the issues around what I consider to be inaccuracies and they’ve not really acknowledged them.


Instead they state that sending other letters (a Pre-demand letter and the Final Demand Letter that referred to a Default Notice that was not sent) fulfilled their obligations under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.



Response from the Financial Ombudsman to my appeal


After receiving the email confirmation from the Financial Ombudsman that they would uphold the decision I requested confirmation by email that defaults can be registered without a Default Notice having been applied.


"I can confirm that you are correct, in line with industry guidance and relevant rules and legislation a default notice should be issued before a default is registered to provide sufficient time for the person receiving it, to take action to try and prevent the default.


However, when we receive cases of this type, we look at the overall circumstances of what has happened. As explained, simply because you did not receive a default notice does not mean the default should be removed."


The Financial Ombudsman did agree that HSBC’s communication, including the call where they refused to agree a repayment plan, could have been clearer but don’t seem to be concerned by the inaccuracies despite stating that there “is a legal obligation for information that is reported to the credit reference agencies to be a true and accurate reflection of the account”.


I’d greatly appreciate any advice on my chances of getting the default removed and the best approach to achieving this.

[judgemental24]

Re: Removal of a default recently applied by HSBC

If you were unable to meet a contractual obligation such as a repayment specified in the contract, the creditor can issue a default notice and if that notice is not rectified within 14 days, record a default status on your credit file.

That is a fair and honest report on how the account was run and their is not a lot you can do about it in reality

They are correct on the default notice as again it shows how the credit account was run, but if it came to enforcement through the civil courts such as a CCJ, they will have problems without the notice

Any reasonable creditor will not default you but record on your credit file monthly markers of "Arrangement to pay" (AP) until any arrears have been paid or the account back in order. But they do not have to

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Removal of a default recently applied by HSBC

The Final Demand letter I received in September 2014 stated "We recently issued you with a Default Notice on the above account." I have never received one nor has HSBC been able to provide evidence of ever having issued one.

Following receipt of the Final Demand notice I called to arrange repayment of approximately 50% of the outstanding sum with a suggestion of repaying the remaining balance but the agent I spoke to insisted that there was nothing I could do to arrange a repayment plan and I’d have to wait until I was contacted by HSBC Repayment Services (HRS).

HSBC did not make it clear on the call that transferal to HRS would result in a default being registered and that the only way to prevent a default from being registered was to pay the full debt at that time.

I consider that I was treated unfairly as the repeated offer in the letter to make suitable arrangements appears not to be genuine and as such, and for the purpose of clear communication, should not have been included in the letter.

HSBC also declined my request to clarify this by email following the call. I requested this as the advice given in the letter and the conversation differed so greatly and I was confused by the unclear explanation of the process.

The Final Demand letter stated

"If you do not make full payment or make a suitable arrangement with us..." and under the "help is available” section specified that “if you are unable to pay the full amount at this time, please call the above number and we will try to work with you to come to a suitable arrangement”

HSBC have subsequently responded to me to state that

“As the Final Demand had already been set, only repayment of the full outstanding balance would have prevented the account from being passed to HRS and a Default registered with the CRA's.”

The principles for reporting to the CRAs state that a default can be recorded when the relationship with your lender has broken down. With accounts that have set repayment schedules such as loans and credit cards, that would be after being in arrears for a few months. As there are no scheduled repayments for an overdraft, the bank has to issue a final demand when there's been an unacceptably long period of time without payments made into the overdrawn account. Issuing a final demand is an indication that the relationship has broken down and therefore a reason to record a default. The principles also say that a default should not be recorded if the overdrawn balance is made up exclusively of fees and charges.

A default should not be filed:

• If you make a payment, in time, that fully meets the terms set out in thedefault notice
• If jointly with the lender an agreement is reached for an arrangement and youkeep to the terms of that arrangement
• If the amount outstanding is solely made up of fees or charges

I consider that I was treated unfairly as the repeated offer in the letter to make suitable arrangements appears not to be genuine and as such, and for the purpose of clear communication, should not have been included in the letter.

The offer in question would have referred to giving you the option to pay in installments as opposed to them taking you to court and obtaining a CCJ for the full amount (which they would be entitled to do) and then enforcing the judgment if you don't make the payments ordered by the court.

Inaccurate registration of Defaults

HSBC have subsequently registered a default with only 2 of the three CRA’s but did so approximately 4 months after they told me they’d closed the account and registered the default.

I’m not sure why the default was registered so long after HSBC say the account was closed and why the default has not been registered with all CRA’s.

Whilst recording a default in this case was in accordance with the principles for reporting to the CRAs, the date when it was recorded may not have been if it was much later than the final demand and you could have an argument to get the date amended.

In addition to this HSBC had never registered anything with any credit reference agency before April 2015 (presumably because my account was opened in 1992 before they were obliged to share information with Credit Reference Agencies) and as the date of closure of the account didn't match the date of closure stated by HSBC as my account closure date I don't consider this statement to be accurate.

For current accounts, a balance will only be reported to the CRAs if it's overdrawn.

I’d greatly appreciate any advice on my chances of getting the default removed and the best approach to achieving this.

IMHO not very good I'm afraid as they have reported your conduct with the account, i.e. that you didn't pay the overdrawn balance which is pretty much like a loan in terms of it being the bank's money which the bank would expected to be paid back to them, if you fail to do so a default can be recorded. The one thing you could do is try to get the default date amended, although in the bigger scheme of things it may not make much difference since it's out just by a few months.

[not-impressed]

Re: Removal of a default recently applied by HSBC

The principles for reporting to the CRAs state that a default can be recorded when the relationship with your lender has broken down. With accounts that have set repayment schedules such as loans and credit cards, that would be after being in arrears for a few months. As there are no scheduled repayments for an overdraft, the bank has to issue a final demand when there's been an unacceptably long period of time without payments made into the overdrawn account. Issuing a final demand is an indication that the relationship has broken down and therefore a reason to record a default. The principles also say that a default should not be recorded if the overdrawn balance is made up exclusively of fees and charges.
[/LIST]


The offer in question would have referred to giving you the option to pay in installments as opposed to them taking you to court and obtaining a CCJ for the full amount (which they would be entitled to do) and then enforcing the judgment if you don't make the payments ordered by the court.


[/COLOR][/B]Whilst recording a default in this case was in accordance with the principles for reporting to the CRAs, the date when it was recorded may not have been if it was much later than the final demand and you could have an argument to get the date amended.


For current accounts, a balance will only be reported to the CRAs if it's overdrawn.


IMHO not very good I'm afraid as they have reported your conduct with the account, i.e. that you didn't pay the overdrawn balance which is pretty much like a loan in terms of it being the bank's money which the bank would expected to be paid back to them, if you fail to do so a default can be recorded. The one thing you could do is try to get the default date amended, although in the bigger scheme of things it may not make much difference since it's out just by a few months.

Thank you for your comments and for your time in responding to my post.

You stated that "For current accounts, a balance will only be reported to the CRAs if it's overdrawn."

My account was withdrawn for sometime and nothing ever appeared on any credit report. Which (to me at least) means that really mean HSBC haven't provided “a true reflection of how the account has been maintained". In addition to this there was no record of any payment made by me when the account was considered to have defaulted. I believe this should have been done?

Would this be a matter for the ICO?

[Kafka]

Re: Removal of a default recently applied by HSBC

I can't see how the ICO would touch this. Their job is to deal with noncompliance with data requests such as Subject Access Requests or Freedom of Information requests. The bank here hasn't refused to supply you with data.

Current accounts and defaults are a grey area because any OD is effectively a favour granted to you and you have none of the usual protections that you have for agreements regulated by the CCA. The terms of any OD are that the bank can recall it at any time and so you have little come-back if they aren't very helpful.

The date of registering the default can probably be successfully challenged, as stated by FP, but I can't see any grounds for removal, however badly you feel you've been treated. You haven't mentioned bank charges applied to the OD. What do they add up to before the date of default, and how do they compare with the overdrawn amount?

[nemesis45]

Re: Removal of a default recently applied by HSBC

I have to agree with the others I cannot see justification for removing the default, backdating may be an option.

nem

- - - Updated - - -

I have to agree with the others I cannot see justification for removing the default, backdating may be an option.

nem

- - - Updated - - -

I have to agree with the others I cannot see justification for removing the default, backdating may be an option.

nem

- - - Updated - - -

I have to agree with the others I cannot see justification for removing the default, backdating may be an option.

nem

[not-impressed]

Re: Removal of a default recently applied by HSBC

An update since August.

I'm seeking advice on what to do next. Approach the FCA?Legal action via BCOBS?

My objective remains the same; the removal of the default notice applied by HSBC after their incorrect assertion that a Default Notice had been issued and their unfair treatment in offering me a clearly empty promise of the possibility to make an arrangement to pay. In addition to this there are numerous inaccuracies in the dates associated with their issuing the default.



Having requested that my complaint was referred to an ombudsman I have just received the final decision. Frustratingly , this didn't seem to even address some of the points I raised in my letter to support the request that the complaint was looked at by an ombudsman (full letter further below). Most confusingly the background section of the final decision document states "Mr M says he was never sent a default notice; HSBC says he was."


This is confusing as, to my knowledge, HSBC have never claimed they did ever send a Default Notice, despite the Final Demand clearly stating one had been sent.


I asked the FOS to provide evidence of this and the following was their response, which actually draws from another section of the Ombudsman's Final Decision.

"As you are aware from previous correspondence, we do not have a copy of the default notice. This was made clear when I came to my formal view and also in the final decision where it is said ‘Mr M says he never received a default notice. I accept that’. If there is any further information you would like, you would have to contact HSBC directly".

I also got in touch with the Adjudicator (letter below) with regard to their comment during a phone call that I had "taken HSBC's comments too literally" the Adjudicator replied "I appreciate that you feel that the default is not accurate or in fact fair, and if I am honest I can understand why you feel this way. However, this does not mean to say that HSBC was wrong to apply the default as it did.


You have said that you do not entirely agree with me when I have said you may have taken what HSBC said in its letter to literally. First of all, please accept my apologies if this came across the wrong way – I did not say this with the intent of causing offence, rather just my opinion on what I thought had happened."


I raised a Subject Access Request on FOS to get all of the information they'd received from HSBC and as part of that I received a letter 0f 12 June 2015 from HSBC to the Financial Ombudsman which stated "I am aware Mr M remains unhappy that a default has been registered with the Credit Reference Agencies (CRA's) in respect of his Current Account. It is Mr M's belief that we did not issue a Default Notice to him and as such, the default should be removed as it is a true and accurate record of his account conduct."


I'm not even sure what is meant by the second part of that sentence.


The letter goes on to state that "Mr M did not contact us until after the Final Demand was issued. The repayment proposal was insufficient to prevent the account from being passed on to recovery services as only full repayment of the outstanding balance within 18 days of the issuing of the Final Demand would suffice."


I have subsequently been in touch with HSBC to seek clarification of the issuing or otherwise of a Default Notice and they have replied to state that as the case had been raised with the FOS and the Adjudicator had made their decision they were not obliged to reply and would not do so and any further correspondence would be filed and not replied to.


I won't be accepting the Ombudsman's decision so now I'm now bound to that are HSBC obliged to respond to any requests for information?


Here's is my letter requesting that the case is reviewed by an Ombudsman which summarises the main issues I believe to be relevant.


Letter to FOS Adjudicator


I would like to request that my case is referred to an Ombudsman for further consideration please.


Your summary was that ;


"You have said you would like the default that HSBC applied removed from your credit file. On review of everything provided to me, I cannot agree with you. This is because there is a legal obligation for information that is reported to the credit reference agencies to be a true and accurate reflection of the account.

In this case, the default has been applied correctly and I cannot require HSBC to remove it."


I would like to challenge this finding as I don't believe it is fair and reasonable that HSBC has registered a default with credit reference agencies against me for three reasons. In addition to this,and based on the information HSBC has provided me,what has been reported to credit reference agencies is inaccurate and is therefore not a true and accurate reflection of the account.


I would also like to highlight that during our conversation on the 20th June 2015 you stated that I had taken the communications from HSBC "too literally" which I don't believe is a valid perspective when assessing the clarity of HSBC's communication with me and fails to take into account the confusion created by the inaccuracies in their communications both in writing and verbally.


My reasons for requesting that my case is referred to an ombudsman are as follows.


Firstly, the Final Demand letter from HSBC referred to a Default Notice it appearswas never sent.

This means the correspondence from HSBC that claims a Default Notice had been sent was incorrect and completely misleading and was therefore problematic for my understanding of the process. HSBC have subsequently been unable to provide any evidence of ever having issued the notice they said they had sentbut have instead claimed they have fulfilled their obligations under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. I believe they are also obliged to treat me reasonably and fairly and referring in writing to correspondence they have not sent to me is misleading and therefore entirely unfair and unreasonable.


Secondly, the letter from HSBC of 22 May 2015 goes on to state that "As the Final Demand letter had already been sent, only repayment of the full outstanding balance would have prevented the account from being passed to HRS and a default from being registered with the CRA's."

However, as mentioned previously,the Final Demand letter clearly states that "If you do not make full payment or make a suitable arrangement with us...we may take additional action to recover this amount..." and under the Help is available section "If you are unable to pay the full amount at this time, please call the above number and we will try and
work with you to come to a suitable arrangement."


The only conclusion I can draw is the offer of help in coming to a suitable arrangement in the Final Demand letter was entirely disingenuous and for the purposes of clear, unambiguous communication and fairness should not have been included.


I'd like to reiterate at this point that I called having read the letter in good faith and was denied an opportunity to come to an agreeable repayment plan that HSBC's own correspondence offered. It now appears from their response of the 22 May that this was never a genuine opportunity.


As mentioned previously HSBC also declined my request to clarify this by email following the call. I requested this as the advice given in the letter and the conversation differed so greatly and I was confused by the unclear explanation of the process and the lack of transparency around the process.


HSBC stated during my call that my only option would be to wait for the account balance to be transferred to HSBC Repayment Services in 9 days time. Against this timescale, this would presumably mean a default date of 15 October. As the default was actually registered in retrospect on the 18 November why was the opportunity to honour the statements in HSBC's Final Demand letter and arrange a payment plan denied so quickly? Why also was my request to clarify the situation denied?


Thirdly I understand thatSection 4 of The Information Commissioners Office "Data Protection Technical Guidance Filing defaults with credit reference agencies" document states "It is an accepted industry standard to record only serious ‘defaults’ with credit reference agencies. "


Given the fact I made an attempt to come to an arrangement HSBC had offered but unreasonably denied, and the default amount was comprised of approximately 70% fees (an annual summary of account charges with a date of 02-Oct-2014 confirms total fees and interest charged from 02 October 2013 to 01 October 2014 of £480.38 - a substantial proportion of the amount registered by HSBC as the default balance of £628.) andall of the inconsistencies in HSBC's communication, I don't consider this default to have been fairly applied in accordance with that guideline.


I'd like to reiterate the immense personal impact this situation has had on me as a 42 year old with aspirations to be a home owner and with an otherwise excellent credit history and a long history with HSBC. At my age a default recorded against my credit reference files will have a catastrophic impact upon my future as this will effectively make home ownership of any sort impossible. The action of registering a default against me which I sought to avoid by calling to discuss an acceptable repayment plan is grossly at odds with
HSBC's values (http://www.hsbc.com/citizenship/our-values) and stated aim of being "Dependable, and doing the right thing".

The HSBC values state that "At HSBC we put great emphasis on our values. We want to ensure that our employees feel empowered to do the right thing "

• Communicating openly, honestly and transparently, welcoming challenge, learning from mistakes
• Listening, treating people fairly, being inclusive, valuing different perspectives

I feel strongly that HSBC have fallen short of their promise.


In addition to this, HSBC appear to have made numerous mistakes in a variety of the dates and details they have provided to me and have not accurately recorded the default with the credit reference agencies.


I'm not at all clear on why the default date of 18 November 2014 has been used and retrospectively applied in March 2015 .


It appears that, despite HSBC twice confirming in writing the default had been applied in November2014no default was registered until after 31 March 2015 when the credit reference agencies were advised of the default. I spoke with Experian on the 21 January 2015 and they confirmed a default had not been registered and indeed no information had been received from HSBC at all. This position only changed in my Experian credit file in April 2015 (Experian records mark the Default satisfied date as 31 March 2015 and that the
records were updated 05 April 2015).


Had it been clear that a default was not to be registered for more than 4 months from the date HSBC said they had registered the default I could have made mortgage or other credit applications without a default impacting on my chances of securing a mortgage or loan. Neither,surely, does this achieve the stated aim of providing a "true reflection of how the account was maintained." Particularly as HSBC has never registered any other details with the credit reference agencies since I became a customer in 1992 and the default details registered do not include any of my repayments.

If the account closure process of an account closing 180 days after it enters the collections process was applied, that should mean the date that the account was in default should be 12 September 2014 (180 days after the stated date of entry into the collections process of 12 March 2014 - mentioned in HSBC's letter of 22 May 2015).

I therefore contest the accuracy of the date of the default and additionally the failure of HSBC to keep the default balance up to date. No repayments appear in the credit reference agency reports and I understand from section 29 of the Information Commissioners Office's document "Data Protection Technical Guidance Filing defaults with credit reference agencies" documentthat "Default records should show the original amount of the default as a snapshot in time and should reflect subsequent payments by showing the current balance of arrears... The current balance should be filed both by those who file monthly account information and those who file only defaults. It should be updated regularly. "


In addition to this section 30 "When ‘in collection’ " states "Where debts are passed for collection to internal or external debt collection departments or agents, the lender is responsible for keeping the record of the default and any outstanding balance accurate up to date. "


I also understand that the Data Protection Act 1998, in the data protection principles, sets 'legally enforceable standards for organisations'. The principles require, among other things, that:

• personal data is processed fairly and lawfully;

• personal data is adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose or purposes of processing;

• personal data is accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date;


As already stated the personal data provided by HSBC to the credit reference agencies is not accurate.


There also appears to be a discrepancy with regard to the end date of my account. My account end date is registered as 31 March 2015 with the credit reference agencies. To this I'd like to reiterate that the letter from HSBC of the 22 December 2014 states "I have looked carefully at our records and can see the Bank Account ending 3380 was closed on 18 November 2014..."


HSBC's letter of the 22 May states that the End Date was the date the final payment was made but I actually called HSBC repayment services to make an early final payment of £28.25 on 02 Apr 2015 (HSBC payment reference 074674)


How can my account be closed both in November 2014 and in March 2015 and why was it closed before the final payment?

In addition to this the closure of my account has been registered with Equifax with no mention of a default and consequently no change to my credit report which I believe to be vexatious.


In addition I certainly don't believe that HSBC have fulfilled your statement that "information that is reported to the credit reference agencies to be a true and accurate reflection of the account."


I would like to reiterate my request that, for all of the reasons outlined above, the default is removed from my credit reference agency reports.


Yours sincerely


Thanks for reading and all advice greatly appreciated.

[Kafka]

Re: Removal of a default recently applied by HSBC

Thank you for contacting me about this one again.

Having looked through the details again, I can see clear issues where you have been treated unfairly, but in these cases you need very hard evidence to make things stick. In my experience, the FOS is a timid and toothless organisation that rarely acts over a dispute if it can find an excuse not to. Where the issues are not entirely clear they always seem to back off, where a court has to make a decision so will take perhaps a closer look and act accordingly.

The other point is that having exhausted the FOS as a means of obtaining justice, you are automatically disadvantaged when taking the issues elsewhere. You accept that the initial problem was your fault after all, and did not rectify the matter immediately.

The lack of a Default Notice is a clear breach of the CCA, but again, in my experience, FOS and courts are casual about this and don't attach due weight to it or seem to recognise how damaging it is. Often banks will just say they did send one - even if they can't provide evidence - and they even get away with sending a cobbled template. You were treated unfairly in terms of being misled and so on, but even if you had documented evidence to prove all of this, I don't think it would be sufficient. The best grounds to challenge the default would have been if the whole defauled amount consisted of charges, but unfortunately that is not the case.

I'm not clear what realistic options you have now. You could take it to a court, but without the full amount being charges I don't see a case for removal that they would grant. You could challenge the date of default, but that would only push it forward by a few months. You could also challenge the details, but again its cosmetic and would still leave the default. A court challenge could also expose their malpractice, but I just don't see realistic grounds where you could successfully overturn the default through a court. Sometimes they will back off when faced with legal action, but as the FOS has already found in their favour, I think that is unlikely.

Sorry I can't be more helpful, but I don't think this is a battle you can win. I would appreciate hearing what anyone else thinks.