Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by pedross

  1. Hi FL As dx said earlier (post 302) it will end up with RED at some stage and this letter confirms that. Lets see what the next letter says. Regards Pedross
  2. This is just to comply with regulations. Regards Pedross
  3. I agree with dx it's a standard letter. Lets wait for the next. Pedross
  4. Yes that's the one FL I didn't know you had another thread, I just noticed that there were two accounts in the documents you uploaded. Regards Pedross
  5. Hi FL I have just noticed that you included another account as well. I was just referring to the HFC account, I have assumed that you are dealing with the other one. Regards Pedross
  6. DX has said it all FL Ignore this and wait for the next letter. By ignoring them it will speak louder than anything you can say. Regards Pedross
  7. Hi FL You may as well ignore this letter as well and wait until the next one arrives. Hear from you then. Regards Pedross
  8. Hi FL & dx Now I have had more time to think about it I agree with dx100 at this stage and you should just ignore the first letter and wait so they know you are not interested. However, in view of your previous correspondence it will probably be a good idea to send a letter in the future to explain why you are not prepared to deal with them. I think they will then go away for good as they can't send it back to HSBC. Keep me informed when the letters arrive. Regards Pedross
  9. Hi FL You need to write to them but I will suggest what to write. First impressions count and you only have one chance at that. I will try and do it over the weekend but you know the deal, if I am taking too long give me a nudge. Regards Pedross
  10. I have not seen any documents so my comments are based on my understanding of the situation. You need to put your defense together covering all points but the main issue with the DN is the fact that it did not allow 14 days from service (if that is correct). The case you need to refer to is Brandon v AMEX in which it was stated that an error such as that could not be classed as De Minimis. A valid DN is required under the CCA for the claimant to commence proceedings and if it is not valid I do not believe that the claimant has a case. I am not convinced that the other points will help but they can be included, I just do not recall any legal precedents to rely on. Pedross
  11. Hi Fluffystuff If the DN is definitely faulty it is a strong defense and prevents the action they have taken. I will comment further if you post a copy or confirm the dates/details etc. Pedross
  12. Hi FL If it was me I would just keep ignoring them. They will get fed up in the end and pass it back. Regards Pedross
  13. There you go FL I only just got the new post email and you already have the answer twice over, now three times. I agree with the above, just ignore them. Pedross
  14. Hi FL I agree with the two posts above and in the order they answered. Firstly I would ignore the first letter, wait for the next one and then decide what to do. You don't want to make it too easy for them they will think you are worried. If HFC are going to continue passing it around I will send you a template letter so that you can respond. Regards Pedross
  15. Well done FL Thats both Reston's & Capquest who have decided that this looks like a difficult case to take on. They know that its a no win situation really and if they lose it will be big time. I like the way Capquest are trying to explain what nice people they are!! Regards Pedross
  16. Hi cB Thanks for the explanation - its good to see that you are busy as ever on the site. Regards Pedross
  17. Yes , you are probably right. Lets see what happens next. Pedross
  18. Hi FL In view of the fact that the reply I suggest contains personal information I have emailed it to you. It includes the points made by others including DX and 42 man, which are obviously relevant, but goes into a little more detail to establish the actual position. Hopefully, they will see the light. Pedross
  19. Hi FL As you know I have been following your case but as I have been busy was relying on the email notifications I normally receive from CAG. For some reason they must have stopped and I did not realise that all this was going on. I can see you have been getting some excellent advice from others and I am catching up with events and will post my own thoughts. Just hold on a day or two. Pedross
  20. Hang on a minute FL To save me checking everything, perhaps you can remind me, is this exactly the same letter they sent you in August 2010? If so you sent a reply to them pointing out that they have raised additional points and asking them to answer certain other questions which had come to light. If that is the case you need to play them at their own game and send them your letter again which they have completely ignored, probably because they did not want to answer it. I will look through the information again and do you a letter, but in the meantime just confirm if that is all you received in the post as a reply and did it come from HFC. Regards Pedross
  21. You just need to wait for the next letter now FL For a start I don't think they have summed up your correspondence very well. No doubt they will investigate your complaint and send you a final reply stating that they can find nothing wrong with the procedures. The bottom line is that they will be crazy to take legal action with the chance of success quite low, the potential cost quite high and £3 a month if they do succeed. I am surprised that they have not taken a commercial decision and just written off the debt. Lets wait for the next letter, which will arrive in due course. Pedross
  22. Hi FL Well they are trying I will give them that....very trying! Lets see what the next letter says. Pedross
  23. Exactly what I wrote CB, Pedross
  24. Hi FL I sent the reply as an attachment by email for ease. Regards Pedross
  • Create New...