Trust Deed Forum
Home Home Page

Trust Deed Forum
Trust Deed Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
 All Forums
 Trust Deeds
 Scottish Trust Deed Forum
 RBS PPI Claim After Trust Deed - 2019

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!


* Forum Code is OFF
Smile [:)] Big Smile [:D] Cool [8D] Blush [:I]
Tongue [:P] Evil [):] Wink [;)] Clown [:o)]
Black Eye [B)] Eight Ball [8] Frown [:(] Shy [8)]
Shocked [:0] Angry [:(!] Dead [xx(] Sleepy [|)]
Kisses [:X] Approve [^] Disapprove [V] Question [?]

Check here to subscribe to this topic.

T O P I C    R E V I E W
Bacardibill Posted - 12 August 2019 : 18:42:25
For Info : Today I had a very dissapointing response from the FO, I had a complaint with them with regards RBS offsetting PPI monies against previous trust deed debt despite being discharged.
The FO hae gone with RBS despite the Donnelly case and up and coming October court case...........comment from my FO letter :

"I appreciate that you granted a trust deed and were
subsequently discharged, but I don’t think that makes a difference. I don’t think it would be fair to ask RBS to repay you the extra you paid for PPI that was offset,so your claim is denied"

I would be intetested to hear if any other forum members have had a response from FO with there existing claims about offset.
15   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
MrBlue32 Posted - 05 December 2021 : 18:50:17
[i]Originally posted by head-just-above-water[/i]
[br]I got three letters from rbs saying they have now set off the ppi even though I did not agree and they are basically saying they received no money from the trust deed even though my trustee have shown me the proof they put in a claim and got the lions share. So I have emailed the court of season to point out that rbs have disregard the order of the court that says they need to raise an action to claim set off in the cases of completed and discharged trust deeds. Will wait to here back.


Same has happened to me. They have sent out letters stating that they have transferred all PPI Monies that i am due to the outstanding debt. (Kind of defeats why a trust-deed exists, if this is what they are allowed to do)
Also, it's a farce, that banks are ordered by their regulator to pay consumers for cheating them in the first place, then they use that money to pay themselves.
I have written to the FCA and will see what their response is going to be.

head-just-above-water Posted - 15 November 2021 : 13:08:26
I got three letters from rbs saying they have now set off the ppi even though I did not agree and they are basically saying they received no money from the trust deed even though my trustee have shown me the proof they put in a claim and got the lions share. So I have emailed the court of season to point out that rbs have disregard the order of the court that says they need to raise an action to claim set off in the cases of completed and discharged trust deeds. Will wait to here back.

dev61 Posted - 15 November 2021 : 12:38:32
Hi BacardiBill
Similar response from the AiB that they had no jurisdiction over a discharged Trust Deed, although I did find their response amicable.
They did check my Trust Deed and noted:

'I have looked into what data we have on your discharge back in August 2012 and I can find no errors, omissions or evidence of maladministration mostly by virtue of PPI not having been a factor at that time.'

Which I have passed to my MP

They also noted I was not alone in this complaint with a few complaints and mentioning Forums online regarding this complaint, so it is out there.

I have also seen a very lengthy response from the litigation team to my MP, saying no more than their usual blah, blah that the last Court ruling was a success. I have replied at length also, disputing and arguing their points.
dev61 Posted - 16 October 2021 : 16:18:30
I haven't had a reply from the AiB since requesting more details to find my Trust Deed, discharged 2012, been over a week now, although they know I have contacted the first ministers office and my MP is on the case also. I might get a more detailed reply.
RBS/Natwest have replied to my MP with the same rubbish as we have been provided. Claiming a successful result from the last case, failing to point out they lost the case because of a Trust Deed.
They had the audacity, to send to my MP as the ruling was 72 pages long, he would be better reading the summary of the ruling in the pro bank, Tory newspaper the Scotsman and provided a link.
I replied to my MP pointing out this was not a successful ruling only clarifying by law they could request set off, but was refused because of the Trust Deed.
I also sent him the full 72 page ruling asking him to show to a lawyer for their interpretation, if this was such a successful ruling for RBS/Natwest.
Involve your MP's.
Maverick: that's nonsense from that claims company, your trustee does not exist as they have been discharged also. Your trustee would not want anything to do with any compensation now, the funds have been distributed.
maverick267 Posted - 16 October 2021 : 13:02:19
been discharged for 4 years now tired gb ppi reclaimers and got told even if we get ppi back it must goto your trustee even though your discharged from a trust deed why i never bothered to try an reclaim think its al too late now anyway?
Bacardibill Posted - 16 October 2021 : 09:22:46
Again another negative response from AIB, they say they can only assist with people with existing Trust Deeds not those been discharged.
Where to next !!!!
dev61 Posted - 09 October 2021 : 18:19:20
Did the same bacardibill.
I've also now passed to the AiB.
Was noted by the FCA that that they were interested in knowing how banks that they authorised were behaving.
I think the more edtablishments know about this scandal the better.
They have not responded with any updates to my MP to date.
I just keep pointing out this compensation money for their doing before i went into a trust deed, and possibly could have prevented me having to make such a life changing decision.
It will never be their money in any case, its not theirs to keep, even if i dont take them to court. It is my compensation and they must involve me with anything they want to and I'm not accepting set off.
They have published profits for 2021 at almost 2 billion pounds, bailed out by public money, and they cannot compensate like all other banks for their wrong doing in the PPI scandal
Bacardibill Posted - 08 October 2021 : 12:24:01
My recent complaint to the FCA was rejected as usual, they pushed the problem onto Accountants In Bankruptcy based in Ayrshire, gave me an e mail address to raise my complaint
The fight continues !!!
dev61 Posted - 20 September 2021 : 18:50:14
Hi Kevin

As suggested I have also opened a case with the FCA, see below.

You are no doubt aware of the RBS/Natwest Supreme Court cases involving refusing to reimburse former customers who were in a Trust Deed.
The last case, in which they lost, they applied for set off the compensation through the Court, by applying to reopen the Trust Deed. As part of the case they requested for it to be confirmed that set off was a legal action they could pursue, this was answered by Lady Wolffe, confirming that it is a legal pursuit but it would be at the Courts discretion on the circumstances of the case if it was to be granted. In this case, set off was refused by Lady Wolffe as there was “cogent reasons” to refuse the reduction sought. I would regard it as bearing unduly harshly on the debtor, or it being “unjust and inconvenient” to reopen a discharged Trust Deed.
Since this Court decision, RBS/Natwest have been using this Court decision as a ruling in their favour, to say to anyone who still has a complaint and was in a Trust Deed that they would seek set off.
To me this is flouting a Supreme Court ruling to their own interpretation.
Their response to customers is they will seek through the Courts to apply set off at the expense to the customer, or they will conclude the complaint. When you refuse to have the complaint concluded, they change their tactic to say you will have to take us to Court where we will defend our case with set off.
This is just bully boy tactics as they know customers cannot afford to take them to court or are not willing to do so.
On the other hand, if people just let this go, RBS/Natwest will have I presume millions of pounds of irresponsibly gained money, through the PPI scandal, via compensation that should go to customers, not stay in their vault.
Either way this money is not RBS/Natwests.
If it is set off it must be shared by all creditors in the Trust Deed, not just held by RBS/Natwest.
The customers accounts also need updated to show this.
They cannot do this without going to Court to ask permission.
If it is not set off, they certainly cannot keep the money, it is not theirs, they have it by defrauding customers in the PPI scandal. They must do something with the whole amount of the compensation if it not shared in set off, not just conclude the complaint an keep the assets.
I would like to inform you there are thousands of customers in the same position, and numerous fighting this argument.
I myself have taken this to the First Minister of Scotland's office who advised me to contact my MP, which I did.
He is now dealing with the next response from RBS/Natwest on my behalf, as they are now not responding, including direct emails to the CEO Alison Rose.
I feel this is an FCA complaint about one of the banking institutes you authorise. No other Bank or company has argued PPI compensation with regards to a customer in a Trust Deed, they paid out responsibly as the PPI scandal was their own doing.
I have been arguing this complaint for almost 9 years.
RBS/Natwest have failed in their argument in every Court ruling, yet they are flouting the Courts decisions. They have spent thousands of pounds of customers money appealing these decisions, pointed out by Lady Wolffe as a paltry sum to the customer considering the cost of the Court proceedings spent by RBS/Natwest.

They need brought to task for this scandal.

head-just-above-water Posted - 20 September 2021 : 12:04:26
It's very strange that rbs and it highest holders of office ie Alison Rose is willing to willfully disobey a process or order of the court. The legal name for this is contempt of court and it's the head of a company who is personally liable for the actions of their subordinates.

I wonder how the courts would see this.

Kevin Mapstone Posted - 20 September 2021 : 11:18:22
I wonder whether it might be worth bringing this to the attention of the Financial Conduct Authority? I'm not a lawyer, but it seems that RBS are essentially just ignoring the ruling of the Court. They are applying set off despite the decision being that in order to do so they would need to apply to court to have the Trust Deed reopened first, if I understand correctly. Given that the FCA regulate this sector, shouldn't they have a problem with RBS flouting a Supreme Court judgement and applying set-off regardless?
dev61 Posted - 19 September 2021 : 12:30:59
Hi Mr Blue32
I don't think anyone should be giving up on this or allowing the door to close.
RBS/Natwest are wrong.
That is why I have contacted the First Ministers Office who directed me to my SNP MP.
This is a scandal they should not be allowed to do, and I feel the more MP's who have this on their desk the more focus will be on our complaint.

I cannot afford to take RBS/Natwest to Court either, but I am not going to stop fighting. I feel anyone who takes them to Court, will have a very good chance of success, as my interpretation of the Court ruling is at odds to theirs. My interpretation is that they were only given confirmation that legally set off could be applied in the correct circumstances, but I do not think that a discharged Trust Deed would merit a Courts interpretation of the correct circumstances, as in the Donnelly case.

RBS/Natwest have probably millions of pounds in ill-gotten compensation, from our complaints. It is not their money, they have it in their possession, but it is not theirs.

In any case, they cannot just conclude any of our complaints because we are not willing to take them to Court, they have to distribute the compensation in one way or another as it is not theirs to keep.

Using set off which would have to have a Courts permission. They have to share OUR compensation with the other creditors in the Trust Deed, as it is not ALL their money, by their own argument. How they can do this without contacting our former Trustees to find out who is involved, work out the share, without a Courts permission to look at a discharged Trust Deed?

I doubt they can look at our DISCHARGED Trust Deed without OUR permission either.
They would also have to contact us, showing where the money has gone and showing updated statements from our other creditors balancing the accounts.

In an other scenario they cannot just hold onto OUR compensation, the whole amount has to go somewhere, as again it is not theirs to keep. They have it because of their own doing in the PPI scandal. They have to transfer OUR compensation, that they are refusing to return to us somewhere. Again as it is technically OUR money, we would have to give permission. It should go anywhere other than in the RBS/Natwest vault.

This is what I feel people should be pointing out to their MP's.
They have compensation due to us because of the PPI scandal.
They are refusing to compensate because of the Trust Deed, something no other Bank has argued.
They want to conclude the complaint unless we take them to Court which they will defend with set off.
Set off has already been refused by a Court involving a Trust Deed.
They are using bully boy tactics, because they know people cannot afford or will not take them to Court.
In any case the compensation is not RBS/Natwests to keep.
They have to do something with this compensation, they have been legally obliged to compensate for their misdoing in the PPI scandal.
The compensation should never be allowed to be retained by RBS/Natwest.


An email to your MP will cost you nothing
MrBlue32 Posted - 18 September 2021 : 15:18:31
I recently rejected the RBS proposal letter and clearly explained my reasons why.
Yesterday i received the following letter

"We refer to our previous correspondence in which the bank set out its position on the payment of your PPI redress. This is a position which has been adopted following careful consideration of the relevant judgments of the Court of Session, and detailed legal advice.

We will not instigate any legal action for reduction of your trust deed. You remain free to raise court proceedings to try and recover the PPI redress. If you do so, as indicated previously, the bank will defend the claim and reduce the discharge of your trust deed as part of its defence. The bank's position as set out in previous correspondence is non-negotiable.
Please note that we will not correspond further with you on this and consider this matter at close

Yours sincerely
PPI Team"

Is that the door closed for me on this? I don't have funds to raise a court action.

In my previous letter to the bank, i raised the fact that they have ignored previous letters that i have sent. They have been mis-leading throughout this process. I asked them to provide evidence as to why they would think the court would side with the bank, when my case is almost mirrored to the Donnelly case and as usual they have failed to acknowledge any question that i put to them in my original letters or provide any evidence to back up their claim.

Should i try with the ombudsman or write to my MSP?


dev61 Posted - 06 September 2021 : 15:47:49
For Info:

I have contacted the First Ministers Office and my MP, regarding this scandal. My latest email below prompted a response that it will taken to Natwest's Parliamentary dept for a response.
I don't think it would do any harm, having other MP's involved.

This is in regards to RBS/Natwest refusal to compensate Scottish customers who were previously in a trust deed, with regards to mis-sold PPI.
This dispute went through 2 appeals and a final Supreme Court appeal refused, all going against RBS/Natwest.
The final appeal requested set off which again was refused because it involved a Trust Deed.
There are thousands of us in the same position, meaning RBS/Natwest are withholding probably millions of pounds of customers compensation.

They are standing by a statement made in court that legally they are entitled to apply set off, but only in the correct circumstances.
In the Court case concerned the right to set off was refused, as it involved a Trust Deed and was basically unmanageable. The trust deed would need to be reopened, which would have a massive detrimental effect on the debtor and the set off would need to be distributed to all creditors in the trust deed, not just held solely by RBS/Natwest.

This makes it highly unlikely that RBS/Natwest could use this defence and be allowed to set off, against a client in a Trust Deed.
They will not entertain any complaint saying basically if you want your money, you will have to take us to Court.

They are the ONLY bank that has argued to settle PPI for a customer in a previous Trust Deed.
They have admitted and calculated the compensation, but are not distributing, as they want to set off against a debt that was supposed to be extinguished in the Trust Deed.
This is against everything thing that a Trust Deed was designed to do. It was a legally binding agreement by the banks and the customer, that if all payments, etc were complied by, the debt would be extinguished.
RBS/Natwest are now trying to resurrect these debts, and to decline rightful compensation for their part in the PPI mis-selling scandal.

They are now standing by that they have a legal right to ask for set off as a defence, although they know this is not the type of circumstance the court was referring to.

They know that customers cannot afford or be willing to take RBS/Natwest to court, even though it is very high possibility the customer will win their case. Home insurance does not cover this type of legal expense. RBS/Natwest will hold millions of pounds of compensation because customers have no way of appealing with them other than through the Courts. The FOS want nothing to do with this, as it's a legal matter.
This is just wrong, they need taken to task.

Another VERY important point, if a customer does not take them to Court, and falls their complaint, RBS/Natwest have no right to set off against any of their accounts. Nor have they right to set aside the money in their vault.
The whole compensation amount is not theirs to keep.
It should be shared by all the creditors who were in the Trust Deed and the customer informed where their compensation has gone and their accounts remedied to show this.

Their are a number of forums and groups taking this to task with RBS/Natwest but are hitting a brick wall.
It needs exposed to the UK government, how a bank bailed out with public money, is refusing compensation for a PPI scandal of their own doing.

Can you please investigate and advise?

My point is, no matter if a customer does not pursue in Court, they have no right to the with-held compensation, it is not theirs to keep or off set. It should be shared by ALL creditors in the Trust Deed if that is the case and the customers accounts balanced and the customer informed.
It should not be just left unresolved, in their vault.
How they can do that, I do not know?

kdyguy Posted - 04 September 2021 : 12:07:59
[i]Originally posted by mickyboy.70[/i]
[br]Like others on this thread I've had a letter putting the onus on me to take RBS to Court and saying 'the Trustees should have checked whether you might have a basis for a PPI complaint against us before discharging you from your Trust Deed as if they had done so, set-off would have taken place during the lifetime of your Trust Deed' which to say the least is a bit disingenuous because I was discharged in 2007 when the PPI scandal was not in the public domain! My solicitor has indicated that this could be a possible line of attack as my Trustees would not have been aware at the time of the fact that RBS had illicitly attached PPI to my credit card repayments or of any future PPI claims I might make. What are other people's opinions?

I read your post with interest as I was discharged in 2004 and well before the PPI scandal came along. I have been waiting for a reply to my last email for weeks and weeks now and have received nothing in the post either like others have. I'm not sure whether just to sit and wait and let things play out in hope of getting paid out or whether to email RBS yet again to ask for an update and to chase.

Trust Deed Forum © 2008 - 2022 Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000

(c) Bright Oak Limited. Company Number: 06774006. Data Protection Registration: Z1657982.
Telephone calls may be monitored or recorded. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority., c/o Bright Oak Ltd, Cardiff House, Priority Business Park, Barry, CF63 2AW. Tel: 0141 2490416.