Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is a ridiculous situation.  The lender has made so many stupid errors of judgement.  I refuse to bow down and willingly 'pay' for their mistakes.  I really want to put this behind me and move on.  I can't yet. 
    • Peter McCormack says he has secured a 15-year lease on the club's Bedford ground.View the full article
    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me (as trustee and leaseholder) with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
  • 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
      • 161 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 'managed loan' now OD - sold to CL Finance/Hoist/Lowell - paid until late 2018 - help


HP Mum
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 396 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

1. SAR (£10 fee, I believe) to hsbc. Can someone clarify the current correct address for hsbc current accounts.

I sent mine to:

Group Data Protection Manager

HSBC Bank Plc

8 Canada Square

London

E14 5HQ

 

Surely if HPH bought an old debt for "pennies in the £" the amount they say is owing, isn't really the amount owed ???

If one offers a settlement I understand dcas have the ability to write only partially settled on your CRA file. But if the debt was sold at a really low level and I clear (evenutally when I get more £s) it at that level, then surely the debt would be settled in full, not partially ???

 

The purchaser just buys the rights and duties to the debt under the Law of Property Act 1922. They do not buy the debt itself. Therefore, what they paid and what you owe are separate things in law.

 

I actually got a copy of part of the deed of assignment in one of my requests (I think this was a mistake on their part. I knew the difference and asked for a copy of the Notice). All it stated was that my account was part of a bundle covered by the legal agreement. No figures were mentioned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I always send SAR to HSBC's Head office, at least it gets to the department it should !

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb 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.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

Can someone please advise the situation when hsbc sends back the Postal Order

- saying the signature on my letter does not match the one they have on their files?

 

I seem to remember that this was an issue - ie that they could "manipulate" documents.

 

We seem to always be advised not to sign, just scribble or digitally sign letters - so how do I respond to this request?

 

They sat on my SAR request for more than a month.

 

And have sent several sheets asking me to go in to a bank to verify who I am....

 

Seems huge time wasting exercise given my address is the same as it has been for many years....

 

And I am who I am....

 

And have returned the PO

Link to post
Share on other sites

have you moved since you took the credit out?

 

you should ALWAYS sign an sar properly.

 

there has never been and need to not do so with an sar to the OC

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Update:

I resent the SAR request in Mid May, got a response mid June saying hsbc will provide all info by mid July

So I wait to see what they produce.

 

 

In the meantime I continue to make my monthly payments.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

An update:

I have received a letter regarding this account.

 

The company 'owning' the debt - apx £20k - has offered a large discount if I settle.

If I pay £4; they'll discount £16... What is their financial rationale behind such a statement????

 

They say my credit file will be updated to show 'partially settled'

BUT this debt is not currently showing on my CRA file....

 

I don't have the funds to make such a settlement now but..

..if I do enter into correspondence with the dca and eventually agree a settlement amount

(maybe later this year if my finances improve)

can they update my CRA to show the account is partially settled when currently this account does not even show?

(It fell off my file ages ago as the debt is so old)....

Link to post
Share on other sites

once its gone its gone

its not hurting you

 

 

and if they are offering a discount

as we already know 90% of these managed loan debts are bogus anyway

because of the unlawful way the OC 'managed' them.

 

 

pers id totally ignore them

unless they are stupid enough to issue a claimform.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

pers I would of stopped paying years ago

all yo are doing in lining their pockets and delaying the SB date.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

update

I have received another letter from the dca: CL.

They are again offering the opportunity for me to pay £4k against what they say is a £20k debt.

I have paid about 6k to CL since the debt was assigned to them, 50/m.

Its not secured and its not a managed loan - just a regular old debt.

Its also not on my CRA file. Even though they suggest they will add it to my records as being 'partially settled'. No-one would see their recording.

I don't have the 4k or anywhere near that to be able to pay them anyway.

But I do wonder what would happen if I stopped paying the 50/m - as someone last suggested on here....???

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should have stopped 13 yrs ago

It is the managed loan that HSBC dumped into the OD

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hsbc TRIED to put it into a managed Loan. I never agreed.

So it is just an OD debt that i am paying 50/m against to the dca - CL

 

If I stopped paying

- I know I will get threatening letters from Rob Way

- cos that is what has happened before.

Are they just empty threats?

 

I thought that because I had been paying monthly that it isn't SB.

 

Could they take it to court as an unpaid debt- even after all these years?

 

I just don't need the hassle of threatening letters at the moment....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but they did

Look at it this way

That OD

You never asked to borrow or have that vast figure

And they'd never give it you

 

So look thru the sar and look at what they did

 

You should have stopped paying 13 yrs ago

But you let yourself get cash cowed

 

Let them goto court and prove you asked for £10k's OD

They can't

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry. It's been a long day... and it was many many years ago.

 

they did "give" me that amount of money.

It was a business account (sole trader/unsecured) and they allowed me a huge overdraft because my biz had historically been very successful and my t/o was large; my profits good.

 

things changed and they asked me to repay the od. And I couldn't.

 

So, tbh, I did have the benefit of that amount.

I just couldn't repay it.

And it was unsecured.

 

they passed the debt to a dca.

And I've been paying 50/m ever since.

 

I guess because it was unsecured I should have stopped paying the 50/m??

I had so many other battles to fight that I did not want to run the risk of them getting a CCJ or CO.

It didn't seem such a big deal to pay this amount to "buy" my "freedom".

 

It is just cos time has passed and they have again said I can pay a tiny % in the £ that I now think that they are chancing it;

that the balance has already been repaid by the apx 6k I've already paid over the years in my monthly payments.

 

I'm really struggling with the 50/m at the moment.

Whenever Im late Rob Way is so fast with a threat letter.

And then they offer 16k off the debt....

So what to do??

Stop and just see what they do?

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes

£16k discount!!

 

ive said this so many times

why do you think a world wide bank sold such a large debt and didn't crush you in court

because its a lemon an unenforceable

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

open

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

just re-visiting this after a few years

 

I've received letters from Hoist this year: "do I need help to manage my account?".

 

So much time passed I'd pretty much forgotten who Hoist are and what debt they're chasing!

A bit of file searching and I now realise that its an old hsbc personal overdraft debt - from 2006.

 

The thread title here is a bit misleading as hsbc tried to put the o/d into a managed loan - and failed.   I refused to sign any of their consolidation docs.  The personal debt remained unsecured.   I regularly paid a small monthly amount to dca - CL.   I stopped paying a few years ago - as advised here.   Its not on my crf.  Its not long ago enough to be sb.

 

Back in 2017 the 'alleged' debt was apx 20k and they offered a £16k discount.   in 2021 the 'alleged' debt is quoted as 20k.

Is it ok to just continue to ignore hoist? 

 

 

 

 

Edited by HP Mum
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore then

until or unless you get a letter of claim

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

Had another couple letters from the new dca for this old overdraft - Hoist.

 

**Just as a reminder it isn't a 'managed loan' - it's just an unsecured overdraft.

 

Hoist wrote in Sept - asking me to set up a payment plan !

 

Hoist wrote start Nov  - asking if I need help managing my account.  They state the debt as £20k.   

The last dca was CL and I stopped paying them a nominal monthly amount years ago - but not long enough ago for it to be SB

 

Shall I just file and ignore?

Link to post
Share on other sites

:cheer2:

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...