Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Number6

  1. Hi Palomino Thanks for the reply, I wasn't waiting for you in particular but I was trying to hunt down a pro-forma skeleton defence based on the general circumstances of my case. I know what my defence is but where I fall down is knowing how to put it in words and format that are acceptable to the court. Pete
  2. I need to be getting my defence into court at the end of this week. I'm defending on the basis of an unenforceable agreement, no default notice received and I'm also reclaiming charges. I know that I've seen an outline defence for a case of this type on CAG somewhere but do you think I can find it now? Could someone who keeps track of these things better than me give me a link to such a defence please?
  3. Mea Culpa. N1 from Northampton bulk centre dated 7th May, service deemed to have been on 12th May. PoCs are: It's issued by DG solicitors and the claimant is HSBC Bank. Acknowledgement of service has been filed online. I stated that I'm disputing the full claim. I've now written to HSBC advising them that I believe that my SAR has not been satisfied. Pete
  4. Forgive me if I'm wrong but I think you misunderstand my question. HSBC are taking me to court, I have the papers. Having received what I have, i.e. an unenforceable agreement, should I go to court with this or write back to HSBC requesting proper compliance with my SAR? They'll have to produce the agreement in their evidence bundle anyway so should I just sit tight and put the fact that the agreement received is unenforceable in my defence bundle? Pete
  5. This is what I was considering doing, but should I? I have an unenforceable 'agreement' from them, should I leave it there and wait and see what happens in court, or should I do the 'right thing' and push them to comply? Pete
  6. The question is though, should I write to HSBC telling them they haven't complied, or just wait for the hearing? Pete
  7. I specifically requested: A copy of the original signed agreement and of any documents referred to in the agreement. Any and all correspondence between HSBC, me and any third parties such as CRAs Transcripts / copies of any telephone conversations between HSBC, me and any third parties Details of any manual interventions on my account. A full set of financial transactions ... They supplied the blank agreement, current T&C's, a copy of one letter I sent them and a set of statements. Pete
  8. The breathtaking stupidity, or maybe it's arrogance, of the banks never ceases to amaze me. I'm not sure of the best way to deal with the latest bout, bear with me, I'll explain and maybe you can offer me some advice. I sent a SAR to HSBC requesting a copy of the actual original agreement along with any and all other correspondence, records, transcripts, etc on 23rd April. Today (14th May) I received a response. The package comprises a very thin dossier of papers + a set of statements. The covering letter reads as follows: They have indeed enclosed a fresh, blank "Credit card Request Form" and they've handwritten in blue pen my name, DoB and address. It contains nothing else, certainly not even one of the prescribed terms. There are also a few pages of T&Cs. again nothing that I can see that relates to prescribed terms. I'll post everything up as soon as I can scan them. Now, it's obvious that HSBC have not complied with the Data Protection Act, they've treated my letter as an S78 CCA request and I was in the process of writing to them to point out the error of their ways when I thought, hang on a minute, should I do this? As the "agreement" is so obviously fatally flawed should I just leave things be until matters come to court? Or should I write back pointing out their error? What do you all think? Pete
  9. ..... et quieta non movere. Indeed. Pete
  10. On what basis could there be a stay anyway? With bank charges there were some ambiguous points of law to be tested but regarding CCA cases surely it's covered by current legislation pretty much in black and white? Pete
  11. I really don't like posting like this but I thought we'd agreed to suspend this catfight untill the judgement in pt's case was given? This arguing before the fact is senseless and achieves absolutely nothing!
  12. Agreed. But the Lay Representatives (Rights of Audience) Order 1999 says: So it only applies in a Small Claim case, Joan's was Fast Track so this order wouldn't apply. It seems all wrong doesn't it? Pete
  13. This is covered in CPR 27 para 3: Perhaps one has to notify the court in advance of your intention to use a lay representative? Pete
  14. I fully agree with you and will not be giving in easily. The question to be asked is how do we, as LiPs go about loosening this strangehold? It's becoming a self fulfilling prophecy - the more times the courts allow lenders to get away with this the stronger the lenders hand collectively becomes until eventually every judge in the land will have allowed this to happen and we'll never, ever get it changed. It will become accepted practice. So, seriously, what do we do? Pete
  15. But isn't this exactly what Joan of Arc tried to say to the judge? And it was ignored? Pete
  16. Interesting but unclear. The relevant section of the Finance act reads thus: However, the act goes on to say: Contracts are not stated as being excluded from 22(1) so is this a let out for lenders? Pete
  17. Thanks ukaviator. I have the address though, I'm particularly seeking a fax number or an email address. Thanks anyway. Pete
  18. What does this mean in practice? Say a lender is suing for a sub-6 year old debt and they claim they cannot produce the original agreement? Pete
  19. Is there a fax number or email address on record for Cap One? Customer Services or complaints, something like that? Thank you. Pete
  20. There's no need to post just to sub. If you look at the top of any page of any thread there is a drop-down called 'Thread Tools'. Click this and select 'Subscribe to this Thread', choose the notification method and hey-presto - you've subscribed without cluttering the thread. Pete
  21. No, that's fine and to an extent I would agree with you. But such cases as Joan of Arc's seem to me, in my simplistic view, to be much of a muchness and pretty simple in essence; Lender provides illegible document + random T&C's, debtor claims documentation illegible, breaks Copies of Docs regs therefore inadmissible. Lender challenged to produce original, they say can't, we composted it but here's a random employee who will attest that it must have been so even though he hasn't a clue really. In such a case any brief with any experience of these matters must be able to say a) this is probably a winnable case and b) there are only 1, 2, 3... arguments (insert correct number) that the lender can use. Therefore, say two hours preparation time and three hours in court, call it a grand + 50% for contingencies. There you go mr debtor, fixed fee of £1500 and I'll take the case on for you. ?? Pete
  22. Thanks pt. No disrespect intended but this is the answer that all legal bods give you, I'm not saying it's wrong but there has to be some sort of rule of thumb that can be applied? At least about the applicability of the copy agreement etc? Are there no barristers who will take on a case like this on a fixed fee basis? I mean from case to case in similar cases there can't be that much time variation, or shouldn't be, so the brief should have a reasonable idea of the likely cost surely? It's this type of ambiguity that prevents most people seeking justice because they have no information on which to base an analysis of the likely costs and chances of winning. Pete
  • Create New...