Lloyds is an old english bank that is changing for the worse and has been owned by the english tax payer yet continued to not realise or accept that it cannot act in non-common sense, off-hand, aloof, over complicated and unreasonable manner when onteracting or communicating with its owners and customers. I have a very small company with a commercial account with lloyds and over a year ago they suspended the functioning of my visa debit card. They admitted it was in error. The forced £100 into my account without my knowledge. I refused this as compensation. They then offered £300 as final settlement. I refused this as it was not enough. I did not have my card for 9 days. I could not buy online. I had to wait for a new card to be sent ans them further for a pin code. When i said £300 is not enough to cover the loss of earnings, stress and compensation for the time to work on their error they sent a letter saying they would not deal with me anymore and the letter has bold capitals at the top saying 'final decision'. The time taken to deal with their error has been hundreds of hours. I have charged for this and invoiced them at there head branch in london. There has been no attempt at any level by lloyds to be approachable and embracing. There has been every attempt by lloyds to be detached, blocking and aloof. I then contacted the uk's financial ombudsman. After 3 or so months i got to a legal person under their adjudication system. I then had health issues and decided to pause the pursuit of compensation for my limited company and also to pursue the well overdue systemic change needed within lloyds, both for commercial accounts and also personal accounts. Lloyds also have my address wrong. This is how blinkered and basic the errors are. Behind every amazing sme business/startup is a person called the m.D, or ceo. Their lives,, and those of their family and friends are directly affected by the appalling behaviour of the uk's banking systems. Its time for deep systemic change within lloyds so great britains businesses can flourish, without being kicked in the face by the organisations that need to help them. I try so hard to strip emotion from this an stick to facts. However, this is near impossible as it is an emotive subject. And so it should be, we are talking about peoples lives and livelihoods. I am not bringing problems without solutions. This does not have to be convoluted, difficult and over-engineered. It is time to be compensated for all the trauma, frustration, distress, loss of business face, loss of earnings, loss of address (to lloyds), the many 100's of hours of deep analytic work, phone calls, letters, emails and recording all these. If you have the same story as me, and maybe you are simply exhausted from the fight, id like to hear from you however it has to be only facts and they have to be substantiated by you with a citation/date time stamps. I cannot do all this on my own but maybe collectivley we can create a register of actions, dates and times with how it cobbled your business and you. After the ppi scandals we now have new lloyds authorised and promoted malpractises coming out. This may be the right time to make a change for the better for everyone and to save a major long standing british institution. Please be aware this petition is first and foremost a petiton for change in culture, mission and dialogue and not a petition to get compensated. If that comes then all well and good but that may be a side-effect of the main petition. We need the uk's financial ombudsman onboard as well. It looks as though they are going through a rigourous and uneasy process of change but unlike lloyds, they are open, transparent, non aloof and reaching out for collaboration. This, and i cannot stress this enough, is an amazing surprising and wonderful discovery. I will be making a website where customers of lloyds can start entering dates, times, action, nonaction and proven affects. It cannot be a forum or hangout yet. We have to deal with only fact Eg: 1. Jan 2013-lloyds cancelled my business card with no notice 2. They admitted liablity verbally and by snailmail 3. They deposited money into my account with no notice and no reference number 4. They offered more money as compensation by snail mail letter 5. When i declined that amount they sent a snailmail letter saying go away and marked it 'final decision' Professionals and time-served heavyweights with a desire to change lloyds please join. We have elliott v lloyds tsb bank plc & anor [2012] ew misc 7 (cc) Citation: http://www.Scl.Org/site.Aspx?I=ed26547 Maybe start by writing a brief story Then start writing down facts Then order them chronologically Stay tenacious, focussed and humble and we can stop these crazy lloyds actions. £10 per day for being a few pounds overdrawn=bonkers

For many reasons. to house Britain's 1,500,000 homeless. to revitalise the building industry and its ancilliary suppliers. to return Britain to being a community in charge of its own destiny. We have the skills we have the labour and there's plenty of money around at very low rates of interest.

Students cannot afford tuition fees. It's not ok for them to have to pay huge debts when they start to earn a living wage. It is not ok for graduates to have to stay living at home for many years after graduating because they cannot afford to rent or buy.

The vast majority of people are appalled by the massive gap between the very richest and the very poorest in society; a gap that over the past two or three decades has been ever widening. Most people are particularly dismayed at the growing need for those in work to need the crutch of benefits to bring their income up to a living wage. An effective way of combating this is to outlaw excess at the top and to obligate fairer wages at the bottom. A relative earnings limit which puts a statutory maximum multiplier on the earnings of the highest paid employee v the lowest, should go some way to curbing this inequality. For example, if that maximum multiplier were x50 (which itself is massive), then if a CEO wished to be paid earnings (including bonuses) of £1,000,000 per year, then the lowest paid employee must earn the equivalent of £20,000 full-time salary. This petition doesn't in itself suggest what that maximum multiplier should be but simply that there should be some degree of relativity. We also appreciate that the policy and any legislation needs to be drafted with considerable care, to ensure that all earnings are included (including bonuses, pensions and share options) and to ensure that lowest wages aren't disguised by outsourcing the lowest paid jobs to other bodies. However fear of loopholes and abuse should not stop the brightest politicians and economists from devising a workable and legally binding way of promoting fairness through a relative earnings limit. We do not see such a limit applied to personal investors in and entrepreneurs and creators of new ventures - only to employees within organisations.

It will put money in the Treasury's coffers as well as ending a deep unfairness

because i live under one roof with 18 other flats, 62 under 3 roofs and we all get a bill for rain running of the roof and that really gets my back up. it needs to change now !

Parents are often paying this tax for ten years; during which children can need three pairs of shoes a year. This is an unreasonable burden on household budgets already under strain.

It’s important because if it had not been for our War veterans, none of us would be here today. People should support my petition because we should respect our elderly people. And we should fight on their behalf. I started my petition because Britain's elderly people have been forgotten. If enough people sign, Parliament will be forced to discuss the issue and put it on the media spotlight.

Fuel poverty, Climate Policy, Energy Security, Resource Depletion, even the Balance of Payments Deficit and much-needed support for energy efficiency, they all argue that we need to encourage LESS energy use. But we have tariffs that generally encourage more. Meanwhile billions of our money has been proxied into the complex UK smart meter project for homes, which the Germans decided was a very poor investment. We could achieve something better, something fairer for society simply by inverting the way that tariffs encourage more energy consumption.

Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories cause harm and poverty to Palestinians, and are an obstacle to peace in the region. Israeli settlements are illegal under international humanitarian law. This is important because the Palestinians are currently under violent attack and need resources to rebuild their lives, home and future. They cannot do this if their produce are stolen from them and sold to the Americas and Europe. According to a study conducted by Dr. Majid Sbeih from Al-Quds University for the Democracy and Workers’ Rights Center in Palestine, 82% of Palestinian workers have the desire and willingness to leave their jobs in the settlements, provided that a suitable alternative is available. However, suitable alternatives will not be found as long as the Palestinian economy is under occupation. We are calling on companies to withdraw investment in and end trade operations with Israeli settlement businesses.

At a time of austerity, when almost a million people per year in the UK depend on food banks and when the average wage is stagnating, it's completely inappropriate for MP's to be getting a pay rise. We are not 'all in this together'. http://www.trusselltrust.org/stats To be fair to them, most MP's have already criticised the pay rise. Let's make sure they put their money where their mouth is.

This is a public service, created by the hard working people of the UK in past generations, which has been sold off to make money for the government - but sold at a low price to ensure the certain people and agencies made money on the sale of the shares after going private. This is illegal, against the wish of the people, and a complete sham from a government who are supposed to represent and work for the will and welfare of the people. A full investigation should be held, and those who are found to have made money by insider knowledge held accountable.