08448569042

Got a call from We File Any Claim, they said that they had some good news and that i MAY be entitled to a refund for any PPI i had taken out in the past, they were very pleasant on the phone, i told them that i had never had any loans, mortgages or credit cards as i was very wealthy (i wish), they thanked me for my time and apologised for bothering me.
So just be nice and tell them that you are rich and never had any sort of loan or credit card and they will go away, no need to get nasty with them after all they are just trying to earn a living even if from the posts i have seen here it is a dishonest living.

Been advised to ignore this company

had many calls from these scumbags and done some looking into them as have others in previous posts here.my advice is hang up and call
1. TPS
2. OFCOM
3.FINANCIAL OBUSDMAN
4. ACTION FRAUD
all relevant contact details can be found easily online

Had at least 4 calls a day from this number in the last week.......I never answer, just check out number on sites such as this.....Pain in the [***]

This no and 08451309528 have been constantly ringing me today. I haven't answered as if they were a genuine company they would have left a message!
So annoying, especially when they choose to ring at 19:10 and wake my 6 month old daughter up!

Had a call from these, asking for my dad. When I responded that I was his son, they became insistent that I tell them when he was due back. When asking who they would, they again asked when he was due back, then after asking again who they were they hung up on me!

I 1471'd them, google'd their number and got here. Debating phoning them back, but don't wish to annoy this bloody PPI people who seem intent on ringing us about 10 times a day. Takes the piss!

i have not rang this number back but i have been charged  19p for services G6 rate on my phone bill
  how come they are a pain in the -----

check your phone bill ..i got charged

http://www.oft.gov.uk/news-and-updates/presss ... 12#.UOH7QC0nCSo

Press Statement 2012 -

Yes Loans’ licence revoked


29/12    5 April 2012

The OFT has been informed by the First-tier Tribunal (Consumer Credit) that both Yes Loans Limited and its associate Blue Sky Personal Finance Limited have decided not to appeal the OFT's determination to revoke their consumer credit licences.

Their respective licences are now terminated. Yes Loans and Blue Sky Personal Finance Limited can no longer broker credit for consumers.

An appeal has been lodged by Money Worries Limited against the OFT's determination to revoke its consumer credit licence. Until the outcome of the appeal process the licence held by Money Worries Limited remains in effect.

The OFT's decision to revoke the licences was taken in light of evidence that Yes Loans had failed to comply with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and associated regulations over a prolonged period, and with requirements previously imposed by the OFT.

David Fisher, Director of Consumer Credit at the OFT, said:

'Yes Loans was one of the UK's largest credit brokers and this action sends out a strong message that we will not tolerate inappropriate behaviour by any businesses in this sector, large or small.

'Tough economic conditions mean that more vulnerable people are likely to use services provided by businesses in this sector so it's important that we continue working with industry to drive up standards'.

NOTES

Read the previous press release on Yes Loans: OFT acts to revoke Yes Loans' licence (8 March 2012).
http://www.oft.gov.uk/news-and-updates/press/2012/15-12#.UOH8ry0nCSo

Press releases 2012 -

OFT acts to revoke Yes Loans' licence


15/12    8 March 2012

The OFT has decided that Yes Loans Limited, one of the UK's largest brokers of unsecured credit, is unfit to hold a consumer credit licence, as are two associated businesses, Blue Sky Personal Finance Limited and Money Worries Limited.

The decision to revoke the licences was taken in light of evidence that Yes Loans has failed to comply with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and associated regulations, and with requirements previously imposed by the OFT.

The OFT found evidence that Yes Loans had engaged in unfair business practices, including:

using high pressure sales tactics to persuade consumers to provide their debit or credit card details on the false premise that they were required for an identity and/or security check
deducting brokerage fees without making it clear that a fee was payable, and/or without the consumer's consent
failing to introduce some consumers to the product originally sought, frequently arranging short-term, high interest, loans instead
misleading consumers into believing it was a loan provider rather than a credit broker
treating customers poorly by not providing refunds in a timely manner.
Following the OFT's investigation, Yes Loans made a number of changes to how it operates, including no longer charging upfront fees. A number of other associated companies also surrendered or withdrew their consumer credit licences or applications.

Despite these changes, the OFT determined that the evidence of prolonged engagement in deceitful and oppressive business practices, and the continuing presence of some of the staff responsible for running the businesses, makes them unfit to hold a consumer credit licence.

David Fisher, Director of Consumer Credit at the OFT, said:

'We will take decisive action to tackle businesses that fail to treat people properly, especially the most vulnerable.  

'This action also makes it clear that belatedly changing business practices when facing the prospect of enforcement action by the OFT does not make a company fit to hold a credit licence'.

NOTES

The following associated companies surrendered their licence or withdrew their licence application following the OFT's investigation:

i. Claims Assistance Bureau Limited (Application number 643578 - Withdrawn)
ii. We Fight Any Claim Limited (Application number 643041 - Withdrawn)
iii. No Worries Loans Limited (Licence number 622909 -Surrendered)
iv. 141 Loans Limited (Licence number 576615 -Surrendered)
v. Yes Money Limited (Licence number 568296 - Surrendered)
vi. Lead Response Limited (Licence number 601454 -Surrendered)
vii. Lead Locator Limited (Licence number 543829 -Surrendered)
viii. Crossit Target Marketing Limited (Licence number 513389 - Surrendered)
The OFT imposed 15 requirements on Yes Loans licence in July 2009. See press release OFT imposes requirements on Yes Loans over credit brokerage services (16 July 2009) for information on these requirements.
Credit brokerage consists of introducing customers seeking credit or goods on hire to businesses that provide credit, or other credit brokers.
The OFT has a statutory duty under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 to administer the consumer credit licensing regime, and must be satisfied that a licensee is fit to hold a consumer credit licence.
Under section 155 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, a consumer is entitled to a refund (less £5) of the fee paid to a credit broker if for any reason the consumer does not enter into a relevant agreement within six months of an introduction to a source of credit or hire.
Yes Loans, Blue Sky Personal Finance Limited and Money Worries Limited have 28 days to appeal the OFT's decision. The determination is subject to appeals to the General Regulatory Chamber of the First Tier Tribunal. The OFT's decision will not take effect until the appeal period has concluded.
On 24 November 2011 the OFT published guidance setting out the standards it expects from credit brokers and intermediaries. See press release OFT publishes guidance for credit brokers and intermediaries (24 November 2011) for further information on this guidance.

---------------

You can complain to the OFT as well as alert them to questionable broker and lender behaviour:
enquiries@oft.gsi.gov.uk.

Had a call from these idiots at 08:33 this morning, number on phone was 08448569042 but upon blocking the number (using BT's Choose To Refuse) the number came up as 0163347399.  Reported to TPS.

http://www.ico.gov.uk/news/latest_news/2012/s ... s-28112012.aspx

News release: 28 November 2012

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has today served monetary penalties totalling £440,000 on two owners of a marketing company which has plagued the public with millions of unlawful spam texts over the past three years.

This is the first time that the ICO has used its power to issue a monetary penalty for a serious breach of the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations (PECR) since these powers were approved in January 2012.

The ICO is also currently considering issuing penalties to three other companies believed to be acting in breach of the regulations as the office continues its crackdown on the illegal marketing industry.

Information Commissioner, Christopher Graham, said:

“The public have told us that they are distressed and annoyed by the constant bombardment of illegal texts and calls and we are currently cracking down on the companies responsible, using the full force of the law.

“In March we set up a survey https://www.snapsurveys.com/swh/surveylogin.asp?k=134674895144 on the ICO website so people can tell us about any unwanted texts and calls they have been receiving. So far we have received over 60,000 responses. We know the majority of these messages and calls have been made by companies who try to remain anonymous in the hope they can profit by selling personal information to claims management companies and other marketing organisations. We are using the information provided by the public to identify those responsible.”

Tetrus Telecoms
Today’s news comes after an 18-month investigation into the activities of Tetrus Telecoms. The company is jointly owned by Christopher Niebel and Gary McNeish. The ICO became aware of Tetrus Telecoms after receiving intelligence in May 2011 that the company was sending huge volumes of unsolicited text messages from offices in Stockport and Birmingham, without the consent of the recipient and without identifying the sender – both of which are legal requirements under the PECR. Any replies were then used to generate leads that were sold to other companies at a considerable profit (SEE DIAGRAM) http://www.ico.gov.uk/news/latest_news/2012/~ ... nfographic.ashx


The ICO’s investigation included raids at the company’s Stockport premises, in August 2011, and the Manchester home of Niebel, in February this year. The evidence obtained showed Tetrus was using unregistered pay as you go sim cards to send out as many as 840,000 illegal text messages a day with an income of £7,000 - £8,000 a day.

Examples of the text messages sent out by Tetrus Telecoms include:

CLAIM TODAY you may be entitled to £3500 for the accident you had. To claim free, reply CLAIM to this message. To opt out text STOP. Thank you
URGENT! If you took out a Bank Loan prior to 2007 then you are almost certainly entitled to £2300 in compensation. To claim reply 'YES'
You have still not claimed the compensation you are due for the accident you had. To claim then pls reply CLAIM. To opt out text STOP
The company was set up in December 2009, and is believed to have been operational since this time. The two men made hundreds of thousands of pounds profit during the course of three years.

Niebel has now been ordered to pay a penalty of £300,000, while McNeish, who appears to have taken less out of the business, has been fined £140,000.

The ICO has connected the company to over 400 complaints to its office about spam texts linked to Tetrus.

The Information Commissioner continued:

“The two individuals we have served penalties on today made a substantial profit from the sale of personal information. They knew they were breaking the law and the trail of evidence uncovered by my office highlights the scale of their operations.

“We will continue to work with the relevant authorities as well as the network providers to ensure companies like this are punished. We’re also working with the Ministry of Justice to target claims management companies who purchase this information breaching the industry regulations, the Data Protection Act, as well as electronic marketing regulations.

“Our message to the public is that if you don’t know who sent you a text message then do not respond, otherwise your details may be used to generate profits for these unscrupulous individuals. Together we can put an end to this unlawful industry that continues to plague our daily lives.”

Further information about the ICO’s investigation into Tetrus Telecoms can be found in the monetary penalty notices available on the ICO's monetary penalty notices page.

Further action
Niebel and McNeish are also facing prosecution from the ICO for failing to notify that Tetrus Telecoms was processing personal information. Notification is a legal requirement for organisations under the Data Protection Act punishable by a penalty up to £5,000 in the Magistrates Court, and a potentially unlimited fine in the Crown Court.

It is important that any company that has bought data from Tetrus or Niebel or McNeish in the past, now carefully checks that the proper customer consents have been obtained and that they are acting within the law. We are working with the Ministry of Justice to consider whether further enforcement action should be taken against any of these associated companies, including the cancellation of their authorisation to operate.  

The ICO has set up a survey https://www.snapsurveys.com/swh/surveylogin.asp?k=134674895144 which people can use to send us the details of any unwanted marketing texts and calls.

The information provided is being used to help identify those companies responsible.

We are currently considering issuing penalties to three other companies for breaching the PECR. We are not identifying these companies now, as this could jeopardise our investigations and evidence gathering, however you can find out more about what action we are taking here http://www.ico.gov.uk/enforcement/action.aspx

How do spam texts make money?

http://www.ico.gov.uk/news/latest_news/2012/~ ... nfographic.ashx

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2013/feb/03/redress-claims-never-saw-cash

Redress Claims customers who never saw their cash

Customers who paid Redress Claims to get PPI money find they are out of pocket

Anna Tims

The Observer, Sunday 3 February 2013

The letters are depressingly similar:

London RT of London was cold called by a company called Redress Claims which promised to reclaim mis-sold payment protection insurance for her on a no-win no-fee basis. "I paid £450 for them to look into potential claims on each credit card and was told I'd get the money back if the claim was unsuccessful. I've never received any claim money, or a refund."

AB of Humberside paid Redress Claims £1,700 in 2011 after being cold called. "We trusted them, as we are desperate financially. They did obtain £958 for mis-sold PPI on a mortgage for which they charged an additional fee of £287. And £1,419, £608 of which they pocketed despite the promise in their terms and conditions that they would deduct no more than 25%."

SG from Coventry found that £3,855 had been removed from her credit card after a cold caller from Redress Claims gave her a hard-sell in April 2011. "I never received any bill or acknowledgement of this payment and they've since demanded further payments," she says.

PR of Southport, Merseyside paid a similar upfront fee which he was told was refundable if his six claims were unsuccessful. One claim was won but he was told to pay an extra £149 per claim to a company called Credit Clear Services to have the outstanding five resolved.

R E-H found £3,245 removed from his account, £590 of it for invalid claims. "I made more than 20 attempts to get the £590 back but none of my messages was replied to. They managed to get me £120 back from one credit card issuer and £32 on another and charged me £100 fee for each. Now I've had a letter from Credit Clear Services telling me my contract has passed to them and I must pay £99 for them to proceed."

After a long overdue investigation by the Ministry of Justice, Redress Claims's licence to trade was suspended last month due to breaches of the code of conduct. "We will take further action if breaches are not corrected," says an MoJ spokesman.

Given that a suspension can be lifted after three months if a company gets its act together, and given that Redress Claims will have made a consoling profit in the 18 months it has been allowed to operate, this is unlikely to pain its director, Naman Hussain.

Suspension does not stop companies dealing with refund requests from customers whose cases are pending, and the MoJ recommends they write asking for one.

Simon Helliwell, director of Credit Clear Services, which provided "auditing and legal services" for the company, declares that Hussain will be pursuing "other interests" and would not seek to reinstate the licence when the three months is up.

"We've agreed to take the thousands of unresolved Redress Claims' cases off them for no extra charge and will proceed on a no-win no-fee basis," says Helliwell, who insisted that "in comparison with many in the market Redress Claims was not that bad".

He was vague, however, about what percentage of any claim would be deducted in fees. "We'll abide by Redress Claims's terms and conditions," he says and admitted he didn't know what percentage these specified.

As compensation claims for mis-sold PPI can be made for free with a form provided by the Financial Ombudsman Service http://www.fsa.gov.uk/consumerinformation/pro ... /claim-back-ppi , anyone who paid Redress Claims by credit card should consider applying for a refund from their card issuer, which is held jointly liable under section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act. Some debit card companies also offer chargeback if a company is in breach of contract.

Sadly, though, many are likely to be left out of pocket and will have learnt NEVER to hand bank details to a company that COLD CALLS.

Anna Tims writes your wrongs. Got a problem you want Anna to look into? Send your dilemmas to your.problems@observer.co.uk

Keep getting calls even though we have call preference service

These boot licking [***]... have called me again!!!

They have called me yet AGAIN.     This makes 4 calls..... in the past 3 hours!!!       ARGH!!!

STOP CALLING ME!!!!!!!!!!

Phoned while I was out - I'm pleased to say!

Strange they should call - because guess what, I allowed someone to 'do a survey' on me yesterday (to which I provided loads of incorrect answers!) including many questions about accidents, claims, insurances, and so on.
He promised (ha ha!) that none of my information would be passed on.....well he was probably right - it wasn't passed on, it was sold on.  I'm tempted to say that he knew more about me than I do....:(

These people also use 0845 1309528

Just fielded a call from them on behalf of my father (as they only asked for Mr .... )

Claimed we had been referred to them from a telephone survey completed with MacMillan (or similar) - I know for a fact nobody in the household ever does these surveys - regarding PPI due back.

Refused to accept we have never had PPI and that companies added it via interest rates, I advised we always keep track of our finances and this is not an issue but he still continued his sales pitch.

Eventually told him 5 straight times I wasn't interested and he hung up.

Asking to claim any PPI, from loans etc. Real Pest.  Will see if they promise to remove my details from their database!

Had a couple of calls from these clowns and did what I normally do with this type of call, I ask them to "just hang on a minute" and I go and make a cup of tea or coffee, when I come back, they seem to have hung up?? lol

I have had 15 packs to file a claim from these people - Countless phone calls up to 5 a day on landline & mobile. Everytime I can be bothered to answer I say I'm waiting on the claim pack lol they resend then bombard me with calls again. They have waited on the phone for 10 minutes whilst I blast out Napalm Death records and then call back same thing. I told them that I had died and they said my estate could claim back the ppi. Absolutely shameless. Even after saying I was deceased they still call. Blocked on mobile now but I enjoy wasting their time and the postage fees :) They have definitely passed my details on so other companies now phone me. See how much money I can waste them I guess until I block their numbers. This is harassment and there should be a law against it so we have a choice whether or not a stroppy prick can harass you over the phone and patronise you not wanting their services. Want to claim back PPI? Go to money expert.com download a template away to go. Avoid these companies at all costs. Plus waste their time when you can.