Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.  
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
    • too true HB, but those two I referred for starters - appear to be self admitted - One to excuse other lockdown law breaking, by claiming his estate away from his consistency and London abode was his main home the other if he claims to have 'not told the truth' in his own words via that quote - to have mislead his investors rather than broken lobbying rules   - seem to be slam dunks - pick which was your law breaking - it seems to be both and much more besides in Jenricks case Starmer was director of public prosecutions yet the tories are using seemingly baseless allegations for propaganda and starmer is missing pressing apparent blatant criminality in politics
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Hsbc Dg Conning Letter WARNING PLEASE READ


themadcap
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3580 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi

I got a letter on friday 30/5 from dg saying as follows:

 

We act for HSBC in relation to your claim etc

In this respect we are pleased to note that settlement has been agreed direct with our client and settlement funds have now been paid to you

If you have not already notified the court we shall be pleased if you will write blah blah that matter has been settled

we shall be pleased in relation of conclusion to this matter if you will sign and return the enclosed copy for our records

 

I CONFIRM THAT AGREED SETTLEMEN ETC

 

SIGNED DATED

 

 

 

Wow how cheeky is that, I contacted HSBC on the chance that they may have settled to be told they have no idea about it, as usual cant contact dg - they dont answer phones but it looks like a con job to get me to sign away my court rights as i received my second stay after the oft hearing on 19th april after previously being stayed in august last year

 

Anyone else had one of these?

I thought i should bring it to peoples attention as they may end up signing away any possibilities of refunds

cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's one to look out for.

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

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

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

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

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites

They really do need watching.......they'll catch somebody with that crafty approach......... :(

 

I like your response hasselhoof :-)and it will be interesting to see their reaction - please keep us updated....

Edited by johnnymitch

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good idea , tmc, keep us posted............:)

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I received one of these letters on Saturday but no money has been deposited in to my account.

 

I have sent a fax off to DG Solicitors, below, so will be interesting to see what the story is.

 

I dont believe this is a dodgy tactic to get you to sign away your rights (as that would go down about as well as a cold cup of sick in the court).

 

Once I hear back from these guys Ill let you know how I get on, Im hoping its not a "clerical" error, but if so will still use the letter when asking for the stay to be removed.

 

DG Solicitors

12 Calthorpe Road

Edgbaston

Birmingham

B15 1QZ

Re Claim H3BCsUxors

Attention Jason New Bold

Further to your letter dated 27 May 2008, I will be only too happy to sign the included letter and only too happy to advise the courts this matter is now at rest, however, as noted in your letter, the funds have not been applied to my bank account yet.

Can you please follow up with your client? Once the funds are returned I will send back confirmation to you that I am happy for this matter to be brought to a close (and advise the court accordingly).

Regards

Mailman

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont believe this is a dodgy tactic to get you to sign away your rights (as that would go down about as well as a cold cup of sick in the court).

 

Your faith is touching mailman, - we're talking here about organisations that come up with things like 'Managed Loans'........:eek: . A mere 'dodgy tactic to get you to sign away your rights' would be meat & drink to them they wouldn't bat an eyelid - :rolleyes:

Be interested to see what they comeback with - I'd be willing to bet it's nothing so tame as a 'clerical error'.....more like 'we have a god-given right to to pay you nothing and get you to sign to say you've had it - now just put your John Hancock on here........:):)

 

I do like your letter though............. :grin:

btw - interesting to note your fax went to the intrepid Jason Newbold - bet he's the one behind this latest ploy........

Edited by johnnymitch

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a very 9/11 twoofer conspiracy line of thought there Johnny! :roll:

 

The thought had crossed my mind to sign the paper work and send it all back and then if they still hadnt refunded my charges Id have pretty good grounds to hammer them (as they made an offer and I graciously accepted!)...hence why I dont believe this is a stitchup.

 

Mailman

Link to post
Share on other sites

My advice would be - whatever you do mailman , if you haven't had the money - don't sign a thing!!!!!!!!!!!!! :eek:. Stick with your original plan as stated in your fax .........

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done tmc,:) this (mal)practice needs the widest possible coverage - and by giving it a sticky on here Crusher is helping, but the media needs to know and warn people that this is going on. Whoever started this underhand ploy needs weeding out.............:mad:

 

Let's see them weasel out of this one....... keep us informed please......

:)

Edited by johnnymitch
afterthought........

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another thought....... if the bank say they know nothing about it, where does that leave DG , their pet lawyers, who sent out the letters?

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Evening everyone :):):)

 

Mailman if I had received one of those letter as well as going to the oft andthe fsa..... press and tv....

 

I would also make an official complaint to the law society..... and how about actually asking for the stay to be cancelled given who the letter is from:):)

 

I would send a copy to the bank and ask them to confirm this in writing:):):)

  • Haha 1

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a very 9/11 twoofer conspiracy line of thought there Johnny! :roll:

 

The thought had crossed my mind to sign the paper work and send it all back and then if they still hadnt refunded my charges Id have pretty good grounds to hammer them (as they made an offer and I graciously accepted!)...hence why I dont believe this is a stitchup.

 

Mailman

the advice has always been the same, it ain't over till the fat lady sings.

 

don't sign anything until you have the cold hard cash in your hands!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Evening everyone :):):)

 

Mailman if I had received one of those letter as well as going to the oft andthe fsa..... press and tv....

 

I would also make an official complaint to the law society..... and how about actually asking for the stay to be cancelled given who the letter is from:):)

 

I would send a copy to the bank and ask them to confirm this in writing:):):)

 

Yes, getting the stay lifted because of the letter is my next course of action of DG Goons write back saying it was an error.

 

Ill hold off telling the press, the old man down the road and the man in the moon for the time being.

 

Having said that, only two others (with one other possible) have received the same letter...being three (possibly four) in total.

 

From the lack of general outcry from all and sundry, I dont believe this is a new general tactic. Nore do I believe this is a deliberate stitch up simply because DG Goons and H3BCsuXors would not gain anything from this approach...and would leave themselves utterly exposed to the courts and media (due to the letters being sent out).

 

Mailman

Link to post
Share on other sites

I spoke to d & g (god i am priviliged!!!) said they would look into it and call me back so not holding my breath and said i would be applying to have stay lifted on the grounds of their claims in the letter to which they replied i had no chance on those grounds!!!!

Spoke to my lawyer relative and been told have every chance on getting it lifted as letter is legal response and makes legal claims of settlement

 

will keep informed

ta-ta

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had a reply from DG (I said basicaly the same as you have all outilned but in my own style :D)

 

Seems my letter was a clerical error, they got my first and second claims mixed up... the more I think about this the more stupid it is. My first claim was agreed in April 2007 all of the agreement letters were sent and the court were informed of the settlement at the time so there was no reason to write to me about either claim...

 

I dont think DG are stupid enough to think they could have got people to withdraw their stayed claims through this letter it is a blatent lie and any claim could have been reinstated.

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had a reply from DG (I said basicaly the same as you have all outilned but in my own style :D)

I can imagine your style pete, if the previous one(when you stopped smoking) was anything to go by LOL! :)

Seems my letter was a clerical error, they got my first and second claims mixed up... did you see that pig fly by the window........... :rolleyes::D

the more I think about this the more stupid it is. My first claim was agreed in April 2007 all of the agreement letters were sent and the court were informed of the settlement at the time so there was no reason to write to me about either claim...

 

I dont think DG are stupid enough to think they could have got people to withdraw their stayed claims through this letter it is a blatent lie and any claim could have been reinstated.

They are arrogant enough to think people are stupid enough to fall for it, pete - that's what makes me :mad::mad:

 

pete

 

johnny

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

One person, I could believe is an error, two is a bit dodgy, but four?

 

Are you going to leave it at that Pete or take this any further?

 

If I havent heard anything from DG by end of next week Ill lodge papers with the court asking for the stay to be lifted and an order to be made in my favour in line with the 'generous' offer to settle from HSBC :rolleyes:

 

Regards

 

Mailman

Link to post
Share on other sites

One person, I could believe is an error, two is a bit dodgy, but four?

 

Are you going to leave it at that Pete or take this any further?

 

If I havent heard anything from DG by end of next week Ill lodge papers with the court asking for the stay to be lifted and an order to be made in my favour in line with the 'generous' offer to settle from HSBC :rolleyes:

 

Regards

 

Mailman

 

I totally agree, 1 person, a mistake, 2 possibly a mistake, but 4, or more, no chance. Let me know how you get on with your stay, I'm thinking of going down this route too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all I've just received this letter as well. I contacted DG who have now apparently lost all details of all my claims, lovely way to treat a disabled lady! Actually quite tame compared with the rest of their behaviour. They were going to contact HSBC and ask them to investigate. Amazingly I've heard nothing back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3580 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...