I would add that the Money Shop, despite their many faults, will do anything to cover their backs. My local store has breached the Data Protection Act so many times it's untrue, and when I attempted to complain their head office kept in constant contact with the associated manager to ensure their story was water-tight. In fact, when I first made my feelings known (on this occasion they had released information about my brother's dealings with them, to me, in a shop full of people) they refused to tell me the name of the store manager. It was the manager who had actually committed the offence, and as she had taken the day off when I went in to collect the necessary details the assistant manager (secretly) telephoned her to a) keep her up-to-date, and b) talk to head office beforehand. I've even had representatives of Frederikson International (on the Money Shop's instruction) shouting at me over the phone, instructing me to pay debts that didn't actually exist and were over 12 months old in any case. They're a shambolic organisation.

In the hope of being able to secure the dream holiday a member of my family has been craving for 20 years, I took out a £150 loan with 1 Month Loan in October 2008. The funds were deposited into my account in around 4-5 days, rather than the advertised 'up to 48 hours', but aside from that everything looked to have gone smoothly. I was due to make a repayment of £195 one month after having taken out the loan and, whilst a charge of £45 appeared steep, I was happy to oblige given the joy the holiday would subsequently bring. However, due to another member of my family falling ill and medical bills becoming my primary concern, I contacted 1 Month Loan to ask that they extend my repayment period. They were happy to do so if I paid an additional £45 immediately, with the original £195 still outstanding. After around ten days, they took the £45 from my bank account without informing me exactly when it was going. But, as it was paid, I was content. I then started receiving letter after letter stating that my account was overdue, each individual piece of correspondence adding £15 to my account balance. Interest was then thrown on top of that without prior warning, and just before christmas I apparently still owed £292.50. I contacted 1 Month Loan just before the new year to say I wanted to sort things out and would be happy to pay £50 per month for six months, if they could freeze the balance as it stood. They agreed, and were seemingly co-operative in adopting my suggestion of making each repayment on the 17th of every month. On January 9th I had a call from my bank saying that a number of debit card transactions had been declined, processed by 1 Month Loan. I contacted them again and found out that they'd set the agreement to take each payment on the 7th of every month. I asked to speak to someone in the appropriate department, was told that they were unavailable but that they'd call me back. No such call was forthcoming. This morning, £45 again disappeared from my bank account without my knowledge. However, given my previous telephone call, and the proximity to the proposed pay date of the 17th, I was happy enough. But, within the next 90 minutes, four more payments were taken from my account totalling £275 - £100, £100, £50 and £25, all without my permission. Calling them for the tenth time, I was assured that the problem would be sorted out and that their automated system (which apparently tries set amounts, in £25 increments, until a transaction is successful) was responsible. After half-a-dozen promises of callbacks within 20 minutes, I had myself put through to one of the directors; Pete. I explained the situation and he appeared willing to refund the additional payments in line with the agreement I still thought stood true. He asked to call me back in five minutes to give him chance to look over the account. Fair enough. Or perhaps not. He did indeed return the call, but decided in the interim that he 'saw no reason why he should refund any of the payments' and proceeded to direct me to one of their conditions which basically says 'we can dip into your account for as much as we want, when we want, and we don't have to tell you'. In an attempt to diffuse my mood he said that he would write off the remaining balance. Remaining balance? I had paid a total of £365 for a £150 loan in around three months, and there was apparently something still to pay. Indeed there was - a little over £75, apparently. So, in 12 short weeks a loan of £150 had grown to in excess of £440, and money which had been set aside for other matters was taken without consent by an automated system designed to re-issue requests until they're approved. To say I have been sickened by my dealings with 1 Month Loan doesn't even come close to how I'm feeling at the moment, with a vital £275 having disappeared as soon as it had arrived (the funds were only credited to my account a few hours beforehand). Avoid like the plague - don't let their unusually (for the market) pleasant website fool you into thinking they're worth dealing with.

Following Cobbetts' Part 18 request, my compliance and their subsequent arsey letters, a court date has been set for my case against NatWest. How usual, or indeed unusual, it is to get to this stage I don't know, but your advice will be very much appreciated.

What you have described Plutos pretty much covers everything, other than their attempt to deny the intimidatory nature of the initial letter. But I have also received a photocopy of the questionnaire they have submitted to the court (the orange form which is sent out when a defence is filed). This just makes me wonder whether it has been done as a matter of course, or if it is the beginning of an actual court case. Has anyone else been to this stage?

I took Michael's advice and today received a somewhat 'arsey' letter from Cobbett's stating that they were perfectly entitled to issue a Part 18 request. They also included a photocopy of the questionnaire sent out by the court, which they state has now been filed. Any advice on what is in store for me?

Very many thanks, that has proved to be a tremendous help.

I began a claim against Natwest for £1400 at the beginning of August, with their solicitors filing an Acknowledgement of Service on the 9th of the same month. According to regulations they had 28 days within which to make their stance known - they did so on the 7th September, by filing a full defence. I received the following letter from the solicitors acting on their behalf - a Manchester based firm called Cobbetts - and I am unsure as to what I should do next... This Defence is filed and served without prejudice to the Defendant's case that the Particulars of Claim do not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing claim against the Claimant to recover bank charges (and interest thereon) referred to in the Particulars of Claim or any other sum(s). In the event that the Claimant does not properly particularise his claim then the Defendant will apply to strike out the claim and/or summary judgement in respect of the same. In the particulars the Claimant states 'Reclaiming of charges'. If the Claimant is to bring such a claim against the Defendant then he must (among other things) plead the account(s) (giving details of the name and number of the account(s)) to which the charges have been applied. No admissions are made as to what charges have been debited to the Claimant's bank account. The Claimant is out to strict proof of each and every charge the subject of the claim and must identify in respect of each charge (a) the date the same was debited (b) the amount of the same and © the description applied to the charge. The Defendant is embarrassed by the lack of particularity pleaded in the Particulars of Claim to the extent that the Particulars of Claim fail to disclose reasonable grounds for bringing a claim against the Defendant. The Claimant is required to identify the common law, statutes and consumer regulations that he alleges are unlawful. Until such time as these statutes/regulations and the provisions therein are identified the Defendant cannot plead to the allegation within the Particulars. The Defendant therefore reserves the right to plead further to the allegation once (and if) the Claimant further particularises the claim. To assist the Claimant with the proper particularisation of his claim(s), the Defendant serves with this Defence a request made pursuant to CPR Part 18. If the Claimant fails to provide the particulars requested in the time stipulated and/or defects with the claim(s) (referred to in paragraph 1 above) remain then the Defendant will apply to the Court for (among other things) an order striking the claim. Pending the proper particularisation of the claim(s) the Defendant is unable to plead to the Claimant's claim(s) beyond at this stage denying that the Defendant is liable to the Claimant as alleged in the Particulars of Claim or at all. The Defendant reserves its right to amend this Defence to plead further to the Claimant(s) once or if the Claimant properly particularises the claim. This request is served pursuant to CPR Part 18. The reason(s) why this request has been served are set out in the Defence which has been served by the Defendant. You are asked to provide a response to this request in accordance with CPR Part 18 by 20 September 2006. If you are unable to provide a response by this date then you should immediately contact the Defendant's solicitors and tell them when you will be able to provide a response. In the event that you do not provide an adequate response to this request by this date (or such other date as may be agreed with the Defendant's solicitors) then the Defendant can apply to the Court for an order requiring you to provide the information requested or (in view of the deficiencies in the way that the claim was pleaded) an order striking out the claim(s). In your claim you state 'Reclaiming of charges'. Please provide the following particulars in support of your claim. To what account(s) (giving details of the account name, number and sort code) were the charges applied. In relation to each charge alleged to have been overcharged please identify (a) the date when the charge was charged; (b) the amount of the same; and © the reason(s) given for the charging of the same. In relation to each charge and fee idetified in response to the above, please clarify the following; (a) is it the case of the Claimant the same should not have been charged? (b) If yes; please explain why the Claimant contends that the same should not have been charged? © If no; is it the case of the Claimant that the same should not have been charged in this amount? (d) If yes; please explain why the Claimant contends that the same should not have been charged in this amount and identify the sum the Claimant contends should have been charged. (e) If no, please state the Claimant's case. Please specify all of the facts relied on by the Claimant in support of the contentions that charges are unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent Consumer regulations and in particular please identify (a) the particular statute and/or regulations the Claimant refers to; (b) the sections and/or regulations of each statute/regulation referred to; and © the principles of common law relied upon by the Claimant in alleging that the charges are unlawful. It has to be said that the Particulars of Claim filed were not in depth. They merely stated that charges had been unlawfully applied to my NatWest account (details of which were given) and the value of said charges. Given the limited space for explanation I did not feel this to be unreasonable, particularly when the same method proved successful with HSBC. NatWest clearly want me to slit my own throat my suggesting how much should have been charged in the case of each penalty, as I'm sure my claim amount would be adjusted accordingly. My problem is how to go about providing the information they require. Is there a set format I should follow for the issuing of such data (data which can be incredibly detailed to make life just a little more awkward for them) and is there an easily accessible source for the Common Law, Statute and regulations they require details of? If anyone can provide some advice, and point me toward the laws, statute and regulations in question (including the revisions made in January of this year), then I would be incredibly grateful - and obviously obliged to make a donation to the site. Thanks for taking the time to read this post.

I have looked through a good number of threads relating to claims made against HSBC, but am struggling to find anything which resembles the situation I find myself in now. I have penned a letter (as shown below) to DG Solicitors, voicing my opinion with regard to the handling of my claim and intend to send this by recorderd delivery this afternoon. Dear Ms. D’Aubney, I am writing to you with regard to a voicemail message left on Wednesday 26th July 2006, pertaining to a claim currently being pursued against HSBC Bank plc. I was somewhat disappointed to hear that, rather than send full payment by cheque, HSBC were instead intending to reduce an approximate debt of £1470 by the settlement amount of £1371.06. The debt relates to a Managed Loan which was put in place following the siege of charges which I’m currently claiming back, under the guidance of one of HSBCs account managers. The idea was to clear my overdraft (and remove the facility as a result) and my credit card, whose balance was growing ever bigger due to incessant charge applications. At the time I was a student, with little regular income, and could not have been reasonably expected to keep up payments when I had failed, due in no small part to £1251.06 of charges having been added to my account, to do so previously. HSBC were fully aware of my student and financial status, but pushed me into the ‘unfortunate’ situation regardless. My account was closed by HSBC with the managed loan still in place. I could have easily construed this as a firm indication that the debt was not to be repaid, but my details were passed on to a third party organisation called Metropolitain Collection Services. A repayment plan was put in place in order to clear the outstanding balance, with a full payment due to be made three months ago by my parents. Whether or not that payment was made I don’t know (my parents are out of the country at the moment and I have received no correspondence from MCS in quite some time) but nevertheless, the £1371.06 owed to me is exactly that and as such, HSBC should either transfer the money to my new bank account (details to follow) or forward a cheque to the address at the top of this letter. Having sought private legal advice, both from a solicitor and from the Citizens Advice Bureau, I have been assured I am well within my rights to claim repayment in an alternative form. The letter which was signed, and returned, to you on Monday 24th July 2006 stated only that I accepted HSBCs offer of a payment of £1371.06. No payment form was disclosed, nor agreed upon in any circumstance. And, having read through the letter itself carefully and quoting ‘…HSBC is prepared to make a payment to you…’ I must insist that my request is granted (the reduction of an outstanding debt, if it does in fact still stand, does not constitute payment and as such could be deemed a breach of contract). With HSBCs offer of payment having been accepted, the amount previously stated is legally mine and should be free to be redistributed as required. It is not for the bank to decide how and where it should be spent. If you proceed to issue a reduction in the outstanding loan balance, I will be forced to see this as non-settlement of my claim and a breach of contract as previously stated. To this end, with the backing of a solicitor and the CAB, further action would be taken. Hopefully this matter will be resolved quickly and amicably, but I will make my standpoint clear once again. I am requesting that the agreed settlement of £1371.06 be paid to me by cheque, or bank transfer, conforming to your statement that ‘…HSBC is prepared to make a payment to you...’ The request is not unreasonable on the grounds that the money is owed to me (whether HSBC Bank plc admit liability or not) and that it should be available to be redistributed as I see fit. Many thanks for your co-operation. Am I likely to land myself in court by sending such a letter, or does it air my views sufficiently well to think they'd meet my request? Many thanks once again for any help.

I am 22 and HSBC have agreed to repay the entire claim amount (£1500). However, they are trying to work themselves out of sending a cheque to me by taking the amount due off an outstanding managed loan (full details in the 'Dealing with DG Solicitors' thread). What I am supposed to do now, I don't know. I guess it's a case of either annoying DG and HSBC to the point that they cave in and pay me by cheque, or continue my claim on the premise that the money is mine and not the bank's to distribute as they see fit. Best of luck with your claim anyway, Mr K.

I didn't specify that I would like payment to be made by cheque when I responded to their offer. But then again, I wasn't given the option. The 'contract' which was signed and returned merely stated that I accepted their offer of a full and final settlement. The wording in the letter itself read '...HSBC is prepared to make a payment to you...' So, surely on that alone, an actual payment has to be made to me? The case surrounding MCS is unclear, but even if the debt is still held with them am I right to pursue payment in the form of a cheque (when I returned the 'contract' I did state my HSBC account was closed and provided details of my new account, which is a fairly clear indication of the preferred payment method). Again, any advice will be very gratefully received.

I did add the following passage to my original thread, so do apologise for starting another (I am fully prepared for a public whipping from the moderators ) but I am really struggling to work out what my next move should be. Having issued my claim on Monday 17th July 2006, I received an offer of full repayment (to the tune of around £1500) on Saturday 22nd. I was, understandably, extremely pleased at this news not least because I have just finished university and the money is much needed. I returned the required documents on the day the letter was received, and spoke to the solicitors being employed by HSBC this afternoon to confirm receipt. I chatted to the person handling my case, stating that I would need to be paid by cheque as my account with HSBC had been inactive for some time. She seemed to see no problem with this and assured me everything would be sorted within seven days. Great. I then received a telephone message half an hour later, stating that I would not be receiving a cheque due to money I owed to HSBC. At the time of the charges being applied I was encouraged, by one of HSBCs account managers, to take out a managed loan (whilst still a student I might add) to cover the removal of my overdraft and credit card facilities. This came to just shy of £1600. When my account was closed, the debt was passed on to a company called Metropolitain Collection Services. A repayment plan was put in place with them, but the account was to be settled in full by my parents three months ago. Whether or not that payment was made I don't know (I will be making enquiries with MCS tomorrow, although I have received no correspondence from them for three or four months) but I still think I should be entitled to receive a cheque and be allowed to redistribute the money as I see fit. Obviously money owed is money owed, but as a recent graduate I can't afford not to have a £1500 lump sum not paid back, especially (should the debt with MCS still stand) when there are repayment plans already in place. After all, the money is technically mine and not HSBCs to place where they want. Do I have any right to request a cheque as I was expecting, or do I have to settle for having the (possible) outstanding balance of the managed loan almost cleared? Many thanks for your advice.

Having issued my claim on Monday 17th July 2006, I received an offer of full repayment (to the tune of around £1500) on Saturday 22nd. I was, understandably, extremely pleased at this news not least because I have just finished university and the money is much needed. I returned the required documents on the day the letter was received, and spoke to the solicitors being employed by HSBC this afternoon to confirm receipt. I chatted to the person handling my case, stating that I would need to be paid by cheque as my account with HSBC had been inactive for some time. She seemed to see no problem with this and assured me everything would be sorted within seven days. Great. I then received a telephone message half an hour later, stating that I would not be receiving a cheque due to money I owed to HSBC. At the time of the charges being applied I was encouraged, by one of HSBCs account managers, to take out a managed loan (whilst still a student I might add) to cover the removal of my overdraft and credit card facilities. This came to just shy of £1600. When my account was closed, the debt was passed on to a company called Metropolitain Collection Services. A repayment plan was put in place with them, but the account was to be settled in full by my parents three months ago. Whether or not that payment was made I don't know (I will be making enquiries with MCS tomorrow, although I have received no correspondence from them for three or four months) but I still think I should be entitled to receive a cheque and be allowed to redistribute the money as I see fit. Obviously money owed is money owed, but as a recent graduate I can't afford not to have a £1500 lump sum not paid back, especially (should the debt with MCS still stand) when there are repayment plans already in place. After all, the money is technically mine and not HSBCs to place where they want. Do I have any right to request a cheque as I was expecting, or do I have to settle for having the (possible) outstanding balance of the managed loan almost cleared? Many thanks for your advice.

My claim was issued at 10am on Monday, and HSBC have today filed an Ackowledgement of Service (or at least that's what I presume they have done, as the claim status now reads as Acknowledged). Apparently, this gives them an extra 14 days to respond to the claim and usually signals that they intend to contest the court's jurisdiction. Is this normal for HSBC, or is it something I should be worrying about?

I sent my first letter to HSBC on 12th June 2006 and, having heard nothing from them, the second (threatening legal action should they not refund the amount in question) on the 27th June 2006. I received what I now know is a standard response last week and had my claim issued this morning. How long after the claim shows as having been issued (I submitted the claim yesterday evening and had it processed at 10am this morning) will HSBC become aware of it's existence?

I'd just be thankful you were offered the full amount relating to the charges applied and leave it at that. Did you actually have to take them to court, or did they agree to settle prior to that?

Bookworm and jazzyb, Obviously I wasn't expecting them to roll over and start throwing money at me (would have been nice though ), but I was slightly perturbed by the wording of the letter and the fact that I hadn't read anything like that on the forum (although I can confess to not having searched it's entirety as yet). I picked up a series of leaflets on how the Small Claims Court works from my local CAB office recently, and will now be following their advice on getting action under way. Hopefully I will have a positive update in the near future. Incidentally, is it worth pursuing conjunctive action on emotional grounds, or at least including this in my next letter to the bank? I was a student when HSBC were placing these charges on my account and I have no qualm in stating that I was suffering from depression for much of the time. Whilst the condition wasn't caused by the problems I was having with HSBC, they certainly didn't help and the bank were made aware of this on numerous occasions. However, they still continued to act in a way too many people are familiar with. Again, any advice will be very gratefully received. T.

Hey, I sent the standard recommended letter to my local HSBC branch on 12/06/06, requesting the repayment of charges totalling £1251.06. After receiving no response, I hand delivered a second letter a fortnight later. I received the following response from their Senior Service Quality Officer, Colin Langdale (the letter was not signed by Mr. Langdale however) last week: Dear Mr Essex, Thank you for your letter dated 27 June 2006 regarding your charges of £1251.06. The bank does not agree with your contention that the charges that have been imposed constitute a penalty and are therefore unforceable. The contract between the bank and its customers is governed by our Personal Banking Terms and Conditions. In respect of overdrafts, I would refer you specifically to clause 7.11 in section 2. If you authorise a payment that would, if met by us, lead your account going overdrawn or over an agreed limit the bank consider whether or not to make this payment and a fee is payable for this service. Our fees and charges are clearly stated in our published price list and the circumstances in which these charges will apply are clearly set out in our terms and conditions which you will have been provided with a copy when you opened your account. Whilst I accept that this letter will not provide the response you hoped for, I trust I have been able to clarify the bank's position. If you are not satisfied with the bank's response you should now refer your complaint to the Financial mbudsman Service, as this represent our final response on this matter. Yours sincerely, Colin Langdale Senior Service Quality Officer Obviously the first thing this chap needs is a lesson in grammar and punctuation, but aside from that where do I stand now? Your help and advice is much appreciated. T.