Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Thepower

  1. how about... 'Listen. Understand. That DCA's are out there. they can't be reasoned with, They can't be bargained with...it doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear... and it absolutely will not stop. Ever. Until you request your CCA....
  2. I'm in the same boat, a stolen phone for £250 quid posted it then charged back, any way theres no way i'm going to pay a dca £250 Police arnt intrested, monkeys (dose this mean i can steal credit cards and go mad made on ebay?) DO NOT PAY Basicaly they threated me for months then sent the "debt" back to paypal who have now droped the case. poor paypal:p look at PayPalSucks.com is where you will learn about the PayPal Class Action Lawsuit, Abuse, Fraud & evil behind the PayPal system! for more help
  3. Thanks castle, I've added all the details facts and figures into the hardship section. I'm sending one to DG and One to the court manager of my local court where my hearing is set is that correct? the court manager? not the judge
  4. OK SENDING THIS TO DG AND THE COURT MANAGER: ANY ADVICE BEFORE I SEND???? Dear Sir/Madam Claim Number: XXXXXXXXXX Hearing date: XXX September I understand that D&G Solicitors, on behalf of their client HSBC Bank, will be requesting an order to stay my action until resolution of the bank's proceedings with the Office of Fair Trading. I respectfully request that any such request for a stay be denied. In addition to requesting a stay, the Bank appears to have failed to submit the required paperwork as directed by the Court. The claimant relies on the following grounds HARDSHIP 1 The claimant is in serve Financial hardship, delay in the resolution of this matter could result in the claimants bankruptcy. In my case, I claim £XXXXplus £XXXXX interest on penalties at 8% for charges levied by HSBC, not withstanding court costs of £XXXX. This a large sum for me but a negligible sum for the Defendant. It is of no consequence to the Bank that I may be deprived of an opportunity to resolve my dispute. HUMAN RIGHTS 2 The Claimant contends that a possibility of stay in which the preliminary issues identified in the Agreement of 25th July 2007, made between the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) and the Banks (the Agreement), a copy of which is annexed hereto, are raised, contravenes my rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) as set out in Schedule 1 of the Human Rights Act 1998, Article 6.1. 3 Art.6 1. Of the Convention provides that, in the determination of their civil rights everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time. The OFT v the Banks case is not going to be resolved within a year from its commencement. Further, given the importance of the issues there will almost inevitably be an appeal from a first instance decision and any stay could endure for two years or even more. This is plainly not a reasonable time within which to resolve the vast majority of claims before the Courts, which like mine are small claims. THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE 3 CPR 1.1(2) sets out considerations which the Court must give effect to. (a) ensuring the parties are on an equal footing The Banks and the OFT will be represented in their case. We as consumers are not represented. The case will determine issues essential to many cases, like mine, before the County Courts, yet we have no voice in them. There are particular circumstances in individual cases which will raise arguments the OFT are not aware of, nor can the case be expected to deal with the terms and conditions in all cases as not all Banks and Building Societies are listed as Defendants. Even if I were to be somehow joined in the OFT case, I would have no funding for representation and would therefore be prejudiced in a case with some heavyweight lawyers. The Court would properly ensure the parties in my case remain on an equal footing by allowing it to proceed. (b) Saving expense Expense would be saved by allowing my case to proceed in the normal way. Arguments on this issue are already set out below and apply equally under this head. (ii) the importance of the case My case is very important to me, though given the commercial strength and power of the Bank, of relatively little importance to them. Nor can the Banks fairly argue that all of a sudden the principles as a whole are important to them so that all claims against them must be stayed, as they seek to do in the OFT case. This is not an argument which lies with them to make, given their approach to cases like mine. The Banks’ strategy to litigation of this kind is almost without exception, to put in a defence and settle shortly before the trial. It is very rare when the Banks bother to argue any defence. In other words, they treat cases like mine as another commercial decision. They have never sought to see a case through, take it to appeal if necessary and seek to establish certainty over the principles they assert are so crucial now, they necessitate a stay of all claims. (iii) to the complexity of the issues The issues of whether the Banks’ charges are capable of being assessed for fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and whether they amount to penalty charges, whether for breach of contract or as a payment for services as the Banks now allege, is not so complex that it warrants the stay of all claims in which these issues are at large. The arguments are commonly dealt with day in day out by the County Courts who are more than adequately placed to deal with them. The complexity/simplicity of the issues is no reason to grant a stay, rather it is a reason why the County Court should continue to determine them. (d) ensuring the case is allowed to proceed expeditiously and fairly · This case will not be expeditiously dealt with if delayed for up to 2 years. The Banks have had years to invite the OFT to issue their case against them. Many hundreds of cases have gone through the Courts already, arguing the same points that are set out as preliminary issues in the OFT case. I should not be deprived of the same opportunity that all those other Claimants had, simply because the Banks have elected to take this route vis a vis the OFT. · In any event, my case, as many others do, involve other additional arguments to those listed as preliminary issues in the OFT case. One major issue is the amount of recoverable bank charges and the costs to the Banks of taking the particular step they charge for. There is clearly an issue over what is a reasonable charge for say a returned cheque or at what stage a charge moves from a reasonable one to an unenforceable penalty. These are not dealt with in the preliminary issues listed in the Agreement. It is not fair to postpone the determination of my case because some issues are identical to the preliminary ones in the OFT case, while there remain issues in my case which are unaffected by the OFT case. Fairness is properly ensured by allowing all the issues in my case to be determined at the same time, by the same Court which hears all the evidence and all the arguments. · Another additional argument in my case is the fact that I am in receipt of Working Family Tax Credits benefits which are paid directly into the my account. The category of benefit that I receive is deemed as inalienable under the Social Security Administration Act 1992 (s.187) which states as follows: 187.—(1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, every assignment of or charge on— (a) benefit as defined in section 122 of the Contributions and Benefits Act; (b)any income-related benefit; or ©child benefit and every agreement to assign or charge such benefit shall be void; and, on the bankruptcy of a beneficiary, such benefit shall not pass to any trustee or other person acting on behalf of his creditors. My argument is that penalty charges by the Bank amount to an unlawful charge under Section 187. Allowing a stay will allow the Defendant to continue this practice, which will cause undue hardship and which, if found in my favour, cannot be properly compensated. ADDITIONAL POINTS 5 The defendant remains at liberty to enter my name on the default register which it and other banks routinely do in respect of unlawful penalties which are unpaid by their customers. The banks have direct and privileged access to this register. They have no need to obtain a County Court judgment before they may enter a default on the register. This default remains on the register for 6 years and causes enormous inconvenience and damage to reputations. Were my name to be entered on the default register I would find it very difficult to get credit or a mortgage and I would have to pay higher fees for any credit, which I did manage to obtain. Allowing a stay of all claims like mine would facilitate this invidious practice, which cannot properly be compensated for, should I be successful. The damage will already have been done. IN THE ALTERNATIVE 5 If the court decides not to accede to my request to deny the stay I respectfully request that the court makes the stay conditional on the following orders: 1) That the defendant bank is prevented from applying further charges to my account until the final settlement of the matter. 2) That the defendant is prevented from applying interest to any outstanding amounts which are comprised of charges until the settlement of the matter. 3) That the defendant is prevented from closing my account. 4) That the defendant is prevented from making any entry on its own systems or from communicating any similar information to any third party about any matter relating to charges on my account and/or the payment or non payment thereof until the final settlement of the matter. 5) That the defendant remove any adverse entry on its own records insofar as it relates to charges on my account or the payment or non payment thereof. (The Court has the power to do this under the Data Protection Act 1998 ). 6) That the defendant arranges the removal of entries from the records of any third parties to whom it has previously communicated information insofar as it relates to charges on my account. (The Court has the power to do this under the Data protection Act 1998.) 7) That these orders remain in place until the settlement of my claim.
  5. Had my first letter fron dg today says basicaly their going to apply for a stay beacuse of the oft case and sod off. is it worth trying to get the stay set aside, i''ve got a good hard ship case advice please
  6. just mailed my MP: george osborne MP for tatton (Shaddow chancelor)
  7. I've signed and this thing works if you get a lot people to sign up just take a look at student loans interst payment petition got lots of media and then PM got involved... they had 64,000
  8. Petition to: Abolish outstanding student loans, if the student has been unable to pay back the load due to illness or low-income. please sign the offical goverment petition to write off student laons after 15 years!!! thanks
  9. Petition to: Abolish outstanding student loans, if the student has been unable to pay back the load due to illness or low-income. sign the offical goverment petition to write off old student loans!
  10. great, i want them to take me to court, I’ve done all the proper letters ect.. SARs asking them to "prove the "debt"" harassment letter et al take me to court if you want, but your mupets so pass me back to paypal if i were you. letter I've also has to be nice to DCA on the phone so it's nice to be able to give them some back. If anyones got any funny phone pranks let me know today’s was: half way through the call i made a long straining sound, NCO man: what are you doing me: I’m on the loo I was actually lunching at the pub ahhaahahah childish but funny ...
  11. Is this a good strategy ??? Basically NCO are try to collect on behalf of Paypal for 250 quid Thing is I dispute this and want paypal to take me to court. so we can sort out this issue out, IF a court says I owe then I’ll pay no problem My thinking is even if I lose in court I can pay the 250 straight away, plus costs of what anther 100ish which wouldn’t be a problem as because I can pay within the magical 28 days so no Judgment against me. THAT’S IF I LOSE !!!! So I keep saying to NCO “take me to court I want to go ” “send some one round if you wont, but I can use reasonable force to eject them off my property” (nobody ever come round their liars anyway) "go on do it" put a posh voice on and ask NCO lady out to dinner, hahhah:) ask them to hang on for a sec and leave them on the phone for 20 minutes ect ect ect NCO now hate me! Hahhahahah Might tape them and put them on Utube for a laugh, watch this space Has anyone got any views on my strategy??? Could they do me over and end up owing loads more, not too bother about the odd 100 quid or so…..
  12. I was going to post this…. If you have multiply debts including other companies you could ask for them to pro rote the if not the other companies. If you’re your in a DMP tell them your other creditors are demanding a chunk under the “windfall rules” Any way it’s your money not theirs
  13. Posted to the wrong thread... oppps sorry all, multi windows get me in trouble again
  14. Don’t get stressed they will ONLY take pre 98 loans to court to stop them becoming statue barred, basically people running… Even if you are only paying £1 towards your loan they wont take you to court (they legally can but chooses not too). Could you copy the templates to your web site? Can you find your web site via a Google, et al search?
  15. Short story: Sold a phone on ebay, buyer bought through paypal, Two month later papal said we’ve just put you balance £250 in the red because the credit card was stolen ( it’s called a charge back) no way i sent the the phone used paypal for protection from these things I did'nt have seller protection…… for some BS reason about address L There going to pass the “debt” to a dca, my question is how are they going to collect it? No CAA! Can they collect , what’s my defence?
  16. Wicked web site mate, well done Would it possible to have a list of letter templates : SARs CAA When they don’t reply to a CAA Ect….. I think that would help a lot of victims of the SLC The CAA worked for me it put the debt in dispute, when I phoned the SLC to find out about illegal charges they said it would be UNLAWFUL for them to discusses my case as it could be viewed as them chasing the debt (music to one's ears)… I think your problem is the “debt” has been passed to out side agents, by the look of the letters there just automated mail. DCA just don't give a S***T What I would do is write to the SLC saying are you aware your collection agents are trying to collect an unlawfully, (because of the CAA) and you receive any more correspondence you report the SLC to the OFT SLC hate the OFT as any complaints must be included in there annual report to the department of industry. Believe me statuary breaches don’t look good
  17. Oh and I think you paying way to much….. Remember student loans DO NOT show on your credit report The interest rate is linked to inflation so in real terms your total owe able Never goes up. Perhaps you should concentrate on paying off your other creditors if your in a DMP rather then these monkeys SLC talk the talk, but in fact are pusys in relation to other DCA’s
  18. send them a CCA request , that always shuts them up (its unlawful for them to contact you while the debt is in dispute) when you put the debt in dispute their happy to taken anything then can get out of you. CAA them right now .... then post back when they default, they tend to send shoddy documents late and out of the statuary 12 +2 Read as much as you can about the caa issue in the debt forum golden rule NEVER talk to the monkeys on the phone EVER they will just play with your head and always DEAL with your creditors via recorded post NEVER run...there’s no need to
  19. i know i have to include a list of charges, do i just list the charges dates, amounts and description or the 8% interst too????? thanks
  20. Yes with a joint mortgage, so they couldn’t force me to sell, my point being they might sort out the address problem when they applied for a charge!!! My understanding of a charge is, if you don’t comply with a CCJ the can apply for one and I would make it my purpose in life to pay the CCJ which in fact would work out less or similar to what I pay now, so no chance of a Charge?
  21. So just out of intrest, if you can prove your making regular payments just within your means can they still take you to court? if so why did they point me at Payplan???? hope your wrong gizmo but i think I'lll CCA and SAR them stright away. Might be intresting to see them get a charge on a house i no longer own?
  22. Just a little help needed with address’s I have a unsecured personal loan with Northern rock which is in default and is in a DMP with Payplan When I moved from the address I got the loan from, I told NR over the phone, but I have Never received any correspondence at my new address (which was nice). Which did’nt really matter as everything was in hand via payplan and this went on for about 2 years Any how about six months ago NR started asking for me more money (I’m paying about 50% of my original monthly payment) in these conversations they implied they were going for a CCJ and a charge on my house. (I pointed out they could’nt) Now I know this is probably NR just applying pressure for more money but I’m worried. As for the rest of my DMP it’s running sweet. I’m worried they going to send any summons to the wrong address so I’ve phone them and the bloke on the phone said OK I’ve changed your address I’ve also sent them a recorded letter stating the same and asking for confirmation (none has come) They were the mortgage providers too on the old address so they most of known I’ve moved??? numpties My questions are: Are NR just pulling my strings? Is there any point of NR going for a CCJ as a court will just make me pay the same or lower amount then I’m already paying? If NR send to the wrong address will I get a CCJ? Any other advice?
  • Create New...