The Results Page
You won’t believe what can be achieved until you
try it for yourself…..
But, if you refuse to put-up any kind of resistance, then you are likely to get trampled-on; again, and again, and again. Simply standing-up for yourself can bring results!
Advanced TechniquesMany of the results achieved have come-about from the use of advanced techniques in which the facts are leveraged to create powerful statements or questions.
Key ElementsEach of these techniques has key elements, which in turn can be combined to present the facts in a way which makes the “argument”, or “position”, taken by your adversary, very difficult to maintain,
Target Decision MakersIt’s no use having the best tools if you don’t know how to use them (or where to hit first). Every interaction involves psychology on some level. “Knowing” your enemy/adversary, may be fundamental to your success!
StrategyAnd in the end, it all comes down to strategy. If you understand what strategy to use, and when to use it, you’ll invariably get the upper hand, and with that: the results you want. Check Mate!
So what is realistically achievable?
Simon has a vast amount of experience; challenging the wrongful actions/inactions of corporations and the staff working for them! Below are some of the results he has achieved. This page will be updated on a regular basis as new results come-in, and we will continue to back-track on past results, until the vast majority have been updated here [we’ll remove this box and text, once we’ve finished updating all past results]. In the meantime, we start at the top of the page with the most recent win/result.
Please note: we’ll be using this results page as the basis for shows, handouts, webinars and training sessions. In that way, you will be able to see documentary-proof [sanitised] of the methods we have employed, in order to gain a positive outcome.
Your Home is Your Castle. Social-Housing Success
A single parent, living in Essex with her mentally-impaired son, had repeatedly been told that her son could not be added to the tenancy agreement, despite the property having been purpose-built to cater for her son’s needs.
Following some simple, yet persistent, questioning techniques, the Housing Association were forced to agree with our view that her son should be added, and they backed down. Adding a disabled/alternatively-abled member of the family to a tenancy agreement can have positive implications, and clearly promotes a feeling of home-security.
The case study, and the questions used to lead the Housing Association along a pre-planned pathway, culminating in agreement with Simon, will be presented soon. In the meantime, click below to gain access to all episodes of YAYC.
HMRC Claim £2,000.00 for alleged Overpayment of Child Benefit - Claim Dropped: They lose - We Win
Simon has assisted a number of families with disabled children. The mix of benefits such families are entitled to can appear complex – and Government Agencies tend to confuse matters! In this case, a single parent with an autistic child, had written to HMRC to seek approval for the continuance of Child Benefit, past the age of 18. Precedent does exist (see Qualifying Young Adults), and HMRC Child Benefit Team promptly approved the payment of Child Benefit, only to change their minds two years down the road and demand it all back! Each time HMRC’s claim was rebutted, the amount reduced; from in excess of £2000.00 to £1024.00, and then to £448.00. We took it to appeal, and using some of Simon’s advanced questioning techniques the claim was dropped. Looks like HMRC staff are no different from other public servants – they don’t communicate with each other (Doh)!
Bank Loan £23,000.00 - Solicitors Bug Out - Gone: Win!
In this case, a friend of Simon’s wanted rid of a £23,000.00 outstanding loan balance. Simon intervened, and began to exchange letters in the normal way as per his “Third-Man” intervention technique. We won’t name the Bank, as we don’t wish to give the game away. After a period-of-time, the Bank were becomingjust a tad frustrated, and they passed the case out to a very well-known firm of solicitors. The game continued … one thing led to another … Simon found himself engaged in a phone call with a Solicitor and a Senior Partner. In Simon’s words: “the partner was literally screaming down the phone at me. He couldn’t by-pass my position and was effectively begging-me to pay him – it was hilarious.” Once you realise that all loan re-payments are effectively gifts – and once you learn to question things properly, then clearing debt becomes really easy! Despite all the threats of litigation, Simon left the Partner-of-the-Firm with 3 questions, and a guarantee that Simon would pay the debt upon receipt of a satisfactory response. We haven’t heard from them since! In the words of Goose from Top-Gun: “the-bogey-bugged-out” Result!
Lloyds Bank - Waiver of £900.00+ Bank Charges: Win!
“A friend of mine had been hit with Bank Charges. In this case it was Lloyds Bank “the-Dark-Horse” of the Banking fraternity! I set about intervening. I like to intervene as a third-party: this takes the pressure away from friends, and the Bank doesn’t know who, or what, they are dealing with. I am an unknown quantity – especially if I go-in as something other than Simon G ;O)! I can’t emphasize how important it is to question charges and fees. Simply asking for a “breakdown” of each charge, appears to have the effect of “breaking-down” the barriers, especially if a member of staff just happens to be rude or stupid during the inter-play. I like it when that happens, because I use their “rudeness” as the excuse for management to waive charges and stop any potential complaint from going further. It took me one phone call, and a few letters to get £900.00+ waived from my friends account.”
Capital One Credit Card - Win: £3,500.00 Balance Waived
This case features in episode-one of the video series How to Get Out of Unsecured Debt. Simon had been asked to assist on a claimwhich had already been issued via the Northampton Bulk Centre. Simon doesn’t usually like getting involved at such a late stage. The debt had been sold on from Capital One to a well known debt collection agency. Using the simple techniques described in the webinar (click button below), Simon was able to cast doubt over the entire claim. The Solicitors withdrew from the claim, and the claimant, agreed to waive the balance and clear the credit file. One of numerous wins challenging “unsecured-debt”
NHS Penalty Charge and Dental Fees £149.50 Waived - Win!We mentioned previously that Simon has been assisting families with disabled, and or mentally impaired children. In this case, one such youngster had been taken to an NHS dentist for some work. The child in question had always received free dental care. Due to a paperwork delay with her annual review of benefits, the NHS took it upon themselves to demand £49.50 for the dental work completed, and they issued a Penalty Charge Notice in the sum of £100.00. This was a very simple case of getting NHS staff to read their own literature! In short, if a patient qualifies for exemption, said patient does not actually have to apply for an exemption certificate, for simple reason that they (the patient) quite obviously qualify! A few letters resolved the problem. Win.
Makro Fail to Deliver Flooring on time and Pay for It! Win: £500.00 Plus Free Underlay!
There’s an old saying; “never make a promise unless you can keep it” – especially when Simon’s involved! In this case Simon had been looking to buy some bamboo flooring. So how did a purchase of flooring end up with Makro paying Simon £500.00? In his own words: “I wanted some flooring, shopped around, and found some I liked. There weren’t enough packs in stock, and so I ordered some at the customer services desk. “They’ll-be-in-next-week-guv’, I was told. Away I went, and back I came. No flooring. This happened three times in all. Problem is, Makro HQ were delivering to a Makro store – so how could they get it so wrong? A quick call to HQ – no success. A quick call to group HQ in Germany – Bingo!” £500.00, and free underlay. As Rambo said: “don’t push me, or I’ll give you a war you won’t believe.” Win!
When the Helpful Bank is unable to close an Account: Win £670.00!
This is a case which appears in the WhiteRabbitTrust Retro Training Course: “How to Hold Corporations to Account” which you can access via the button below. So what happens when a Bank is unable and or incapable of following a simple instruction to close a current account and send a cheque for the closing balance of less than £20.00? The answer is simple … when a customer goofs up, the Bank charges £35.00 for the mistake/error (eg: a bounced cheque or direct debit). Simon simply reflected these charges back onto the Bank, and within three months or so, the Bank had paid £670.00! Sweet! Nat West now use the strap-line ‘We are what we do’; So what does that make Nat West? Here’s a clue – it rhymes with ‘trap’ – Win!
Santander Default Balance £299.00, Waived - Win
Simon had been asked to do “what-he-could” with regards to a defaulted overdraft with Santander. Acting as the “third-man” (see Get-Out-Debt Webinar for the technique), Simon went about collecting and verifying the facts. You’ll be surprised what picking-holes can achieve. We sometimes refer to this as the Steve-Davis technique. Steve Davis was World Snooker Champion six (6) times, and he was well known for having a solid game. One of strategies for success was to allow his adversary to make mistakes, and then pounce. By applying that line of thinking, and raising question, after question, after question, Santander eventually gave up, waived the balance and cleared the credit file. He who leaves the battlefield loses by default. Win!
"Spare-Bedroom" Tax Waived - Win!Our Simon does get about! In this case, Simon has been assisting a family, where one of the children has both physical and mental disabilities. The family live in social housing which has been purpose-built for the benefit of the disabled child. The local council, seizing on an opportunity to extort money from people, decided that they would try their luck and claim that the property had an extra bedroom. Said council then proceeded to levy “spare-bedroom” tax against the non-existent extra bedroom! Families in similar situations face unbearable pressure, not least because they tend to rely on benefits whilst acting as full time carer(s) for the disabled kid(s). Often, families have neither the time, the energy, nor the will to fight the council. Simon intervened and raised some simple questions as to the meaning and source of the word “spare”. The Council being unable to answer these simple questions rapidly backed down and “waived” the additional tax in the sum of £700 per annum. This happened for three consecutive-years. Three Wins!
UPS - A Case of Verbal Assault: Damages Claim - Win £1,150.00
This is a claim Simon launched for himself. In his own words: “I drove down to the post office to send some mail. I parked up on the service road adjacent to the post-office, where there is also a parade of shops. I’ve done this numerous times previously. A UPS van attempted to enter the service road at an angle which was too acute for the size of the van concerned. Rather than correct his misjudged attempt, the van-driver proceeded to hurl volley, after volley of abuse at me. I pointed out to the driver that he couldn’t and shouldn’t be swearing, especially while wearing the company colours. This didn’t deter him. Turns out the driver was a sub-contractor and for some reason he clearly thought this absolved him of any liability. He thought wrong. I issued proceedings and settled out of court for £1,150.00.” To hear the full story, simply click the button below [warning – contains bad language]
Claim Against an On-Demand Bond: Saving Achieved - £13,000.00: Win!This is a case in which Simon was assistiing a friend. Bonds are used frequently in the construction industry, and this was one such situation. A bond is typically lodged with a third-party to “secure” a specific-performance. For example: “A” is a contractor, which employs “B” a sub-contractor, to perform specific works. “B” lodges a Bond with “C” (an insurance company). “C” holds the bond, and should “B” fail to perform XYZ, then “A” can claim against the Bond up to a pre-agreed value (value of the bond). If “C” pays out the claim, it can immediately demand recovery from “B”. “B” MUST pay, even in the event that he disputes “A”‘s original claim. The Bond is a confession of guilt. A rubber-stamp job, via the courts. In this case Simon achieved the seemingly impossible. Using the third-man technique, Simon reduced a claim of £24,000.00, down to £11,000.00, a reduction of £13,000.00. Win!
Gotcha! - The Unwanted Double-Glazing Telesales Call: Win £400.00
We won’t spoil things for you! This is a case which is featured in the WhiteRabbitTrust Retro Training Course: “How to Hold Corporations to Account”. You can find it by clicking the button below. Here’s what happened in Simon’s own words: “I was at home when the phone went. It was clearly a telesales call. After some initial games play in which I verify the company phoning is bona-fide, I asked to be transferred up the line so as to complain, but staff-members decided to play games with me (Big-Mistake)! 3-4 hours later, having liaised with the Managing Director, my Bank Account was credited with £400.00. Sometimes you have to be persistent in order to get a result. I tend to use their mistakes, and their poor treatment of me, as an excuse to increase the damages! Once we’d agreed the damages, I explained to the MD how “money” works, and why his “mortgage” was most likely void. He thanked me and said it was the best £400.00 he’d ever spent!” Now how’s that for a result? Simon collects £400.00 and the party paying-out thanks him for it!
Glyn Hopkin Ltd (Honda Dealership) - Data Protection Act Breach: Court Win!A few years back, I had a Honda 4×4, on lease. I was invited to the Romford Honda Dealership for a free tyre and engine safety check. At the end of the “service”, I was asked to sign-off a worksheet, which was then added to the service-history. I noted two questions regarding future mailings, which I declined to receive. A year or so later, I received a mail-shot. I wrote back demanding £125.00 damages, for the timeI had wasted in telling them what I had already told them – i.e., I didn’t wish to receive mail-shots! A rather snotty woman wrote back and refused to pay. They sent me a second mailshot. Again I demanded damages. Again they refused to pay. So I issued small claims court proceedings. I won the case, but received no damages because I had forgotten (like a donut) to establish damages [ie, I should have brought onto the record the recorded delivery receipt for monies spent – doh]. That case cost them around £4,400.00 to defend (barrister fees). I bet they wish they had simply paid up. I haven’t heard from them since – Win!
Bristol & West Mortgage - £40,000.00 Reduction of Balance: Win!
This case is featured in the Mortgage-Destroyer Webinar. Simon had been asked to provide assistance to a friend, following the death of said friend’s brother-in-law. The deceased party had left an estate valued in excess of £1.5M, with outstanding debt (mortgages) in the sum of £1.3M. Simon’s friend wanted to improve the situation for the widow. Simon was granted a Power-of-Attorney, and he set about communicating with the executors of the estate, of which one was a firm of solicitors. The solicitors wanted to discharge a Mortgage “debt” owed to Bristol & West, and Simon authorised this on condition that various Mortgage documents were returned (see Webinar). The solicitors claimed not to have received Simon’s letter, and on the fifth attempt of sending it (via post, recorded delivery, fax, and email), the solicitors finally acknowledged receipt. Within four hours of receipt, Bristol & West had agreed to accept £70,000.00 against an outstanding debt of £110,000.00. Why do you think they did that? We know the answer and We reveal all in the Mortgage-Destroyer Webinar. Win!
Strike! Unwanted PPI Reclaim Text Message - Win: £500.00
In this case a Company called Fresh Debt Solutions Limited had sent an unwanted text to Simon offering their PPI Reclaim services. Simon responded by demanding damages, and; the means by which his (Simon’s) data had found its way into the possession of Fresh Debt Solutions Limited. The Company provided erroneous information and refused to pay damages, wasting Simon’s time further. Simon issued small claims court proceedings. During the proceedings, the Company was sold. Following the sale of FDS, the previous Managing Director (no longer Managing Director) submitted paperwork into the court, and signed it ‘for and on behalf of the Company’ (which he was not authorised to do). This led to the new Company owners/Directors settling out of court.
Essex & Suffolk Water - Win: A Hamper of Goodies!
Simon had contacted Essex & Suffolk Water to question a bill. Before ending the call Simon made an enquiry as to the type of “flouride” being added to the water supply. Simon’s enquiry was passed onto a Supply Manager, whom called Simon back to discuss the concerns. During that conversation, the Supply Manager said Simon was being “ludicrous”. This happened not once, not twice, but three times! (Twice verbally, and once in writing)! Simon complained about the conduct of the “Manager” and as part of the complaint Simon pointed out synonyms for the word “ludicrous”: absurd, ridiculous, farcical, laughable, risible, preposterous, foolish, idiotic, stupid, inane, silly and nonsensical. Clearly this showed the “insult” to be just that: an insult. When asked what he wanted by way of an apology, Simon demanded a hamper of food. The Company sent, by courier, one Marks and Spencer hamper. Win!
Santander and the Case of the Erroneous Arrears Fee: Win £80.00
This is a case which features as part of the WhiteRabbitTrust Retro Webinar: “How to Hold Corporations to Account”, which you can access by clicking the button below. The case emphasizes a very simple technique which Simon employs when Companies make mistakes. If a Company charges customers for mistakes (eg making late payments) then why not use that level of charge against the Company when staff make mistakes? In this instance, Santander had sent an arrears letter when the Mortgage Account was £0.10 in advance. The letter stated that a £40.00 fee had been charged. Simon demanded the £40.00 be refunded, together with £40.00 for the mistake, and £40.00 for not phoning him back as promised. Within a few days, and without any argument whatsoever, Santander credited his bank account. Result!
Discharge of a Charging Order by Convening a Court-of-Record - £3,600.00: Win!
This is a case which was widely publicised on the WhiteRabbitTrust You Tube Channel in a video called “Once Upon a Time in Bankruptcy”. The whole story will be available via the button below, soon! Let us just say that Simon dispensed with a claim for costs from the Official Receiver, acting through the Treasury Solicitor’s Office, which in turn acted through one of their own Lawyers, who in turn had employed a Barrister. The claim had been charged against Simon’s property, and Simon convened what he describes as the highest court-on-the-land, as opposed to “in” the land. Simon was successful: the claim was Struck-Out, and the Interim-Charge was discharged. A victory for the people!
Child Tax Credits (DWP) Claim of Overpayment - £5,500.00: Win!
This case is featured in one of the YouAndYourCash.Com episodes. In Simon’s own words: “A friend of a friend had received a letter demanding repayment of £5,500.00+ for an alleged overpayment of Child Tax Credits. I was asked for some tips, because said friend of friend, had been summonsed to attend a meeting to discuss the matter. I suggested she ask four or five very simple questions, so as to establish precisely who would be liable for the alleged “mistake”. She attended the meeting, asked the questions very calmly, and by the end of the meeting, she had received an apology and a statement to the effect that she had been under-paid in excess of £1,000.00! She was provided with advice as to how she might claim said underpayment and she left their offices with a smile on her face.” Result! Those trusted to know-the-job, and do-the-job, are liable for their own mistakes and that includes overpayments* *subject to the specifics of each case.
The Mortgage Business - Waiver of Mortgage Charges: £820 Win!
In this case, Simon was asked to investigate and question multiple charges which had been debited to a friend’s Mortgage Account. This case highlights perfectly the need for people to question things. Using the Third-Man technique (see Get-Out-Of-Unsecured-Debt Webinar), Simon wrote one letter introducing himself. Within said letter, he requested a breakdown of all fees, and charges debited to the Account. [In other words, Simon was gathering his information so that he could pick holes in it]. Simon believes that someone had hit TMB hard in the past, because TMB wrote back and they themselves had waived £820.00 of fees/charges from the Account, prior to even being challenged! It just goes to show that fear of the unknown, is the greatest fear of all. TMB staff didn’t know why Simon wanted the information he had requested. Their fear compelled them to review what they had done, and hey presto – they found fault with £820.00 of their own charges. Win!
RBS Credit Card £3,800.00 - Short Settled for a token-payment - Credit File Cleared. Win!In this case Simon employed a tactic pased onto him from a barrister. The tactic is powerful, and very simple. It is going to make for a very exciting show (yet to be made). Simon had already gotten the Bank into a state of flux: the Bank couldn’t move forward with its claim, but his friend wanted “closure” and peace of mind. So, Simon sent the Bank an offer of short settlement. The Bank “banked” the cheque (for a token amount), and based upon the terms within the letter accompanying the cheque, the alleged “debt” was now settled. The Bank wrote out claiming it didn’t accept the cheque, but it was too late; the cheque had been cashed. Strangely, the Bank removed all trace of the Account from his friend’s credit-file and has not been in contact since. Funny that! Win!
Obviously, everyone’s circumstances are different. You must remember that Simon has had many years experience, and is not easily intimidated by someone with a ‘title’ like “Company Solicitor” or “Director”. Your results may be different, but you really won’t know what you can achieve until you prepare your battle plan and try for yourself. We believe that everyone has the ability to get results. The question is; are you prepared to stand-up and try?