Jump to content

sallysas

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    1,736
  • Avg. Content Per Day

    0.4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

318 Excellent

About sallysas

  • Rank
    Classic Account Holder
  1. Well I didn't receive anything from them and we are in court on Thursday. I have rung the court to advise no witness statement has been received by me and they confirm the same for the court. I will be sending an email to the courts so the judge is now aware of this and I was told it will be up to the judge on Thursday as to whether or not he allows their witness statement to be allowed as evidence. I did receive an 'without prejudice save as to costs' letter today from the solicitors offering roughly half the outstanding balance again stating they do not agree with the provisions of the limitations act and stating that the compound interest part of my claim is denied. In my witness statement I stated the facts of the correspondence between me and them, mentioned Kleinwort Benson and also Sempra metals regarding restitution. I also copied the monthly statements showing the charges, all letters and hsbc terms and conditions. If I turn up with all of this on Thursday plus Sempra ready to state my understanding of restitution does anyone think I have a chance of putting my case across. I will also take my recorded delivery receipt of my witness statement. The only foolish thing I did was send my final letter back in October offering to settle before the further court costs were paid by myself to the defendant and NOT the solicitors so they say they did not have sight of that till it was in my witness statement.
  2. The deadline on the documents is the 21st.
  3. So it is really a statement referring to the rulings I am relying on and using my documents and their responses to back it up? Is there a previous claim you recommend I look at to make mine comprehensible. I'm thinking it doesn't have to be book length
  4. Yes it does - ' ....... must include the statements of all witnesses (including the parties themselves.)' Rushing too much. Keep breathing
  5. it only asks for original documents and witness statements which of course do not apply for my claim. Having read it again I don't have to get my documents to the court etc for another month.
  6. Well finally I have a court date and will be paying further court fees and getting my court bundle to relevant parties next week. Apart from correspondence, T & Cs, bank statements do I need to print out the legal pronouncements I will be relying on given that I have gone back over 6 years as well as Sempra Metals or are these not necessary except when I turn up on the court date. I did offer to settle with a few hundred off the total but they have not responded to my 2 week deadline. Ahh well, if you don't try..................... Would the judge be pleased if I put a numbered contents sheet at the front of my bundle? Thanks for taking time to read this.
  7. Sending my prelim letter claiming compound interest today using the old cash advance rate of 39.94 as they raised the interest rate but I didn't incur any changes after this 7% increase last July so if I had to justify the new rate in court I think I wouldn't get a sympathy vote from the judge. Posting to:- 7 Handyside Street London NC1 4DA
  8. Some time ago I was advised by them that my claim and rights of action are being transferred to HSBC UK using a court sanctioned scheme. Hight Court hearing is the end of next month so it's all on hold then whenever then. Am I right in thinking this is not likely to result in my claim being kicked out of court. Was transferred to my local court just before this letter arrived too.
  9. Gracious, such a long time since the above post. Successfully sent my POC and filled in questionaire and received theirs back. Yes I did sent it recorded delivery and part of their POC seems to indicate that they had not read mine as it states my claim is statute barred as more than 6 years have expired and I went straight to legal proceedings without engaging with them. Oh really.............. .... It also states I have not disclosed any reasonable grounds for my claim as it fails to comply with requirements of CPR 16.2 and/or 16.4. Should I be looking at this last bit and what does CPR stand for. They have also written to me saying to stop wasting any time I should discontinue my claim with each party bearing its own costs. I am thinking this is just a standard letter. last week was the deadline with AQ so just waiting for court to be assigned as HSBC have agreed it can be my local court. Not too long to go now then.
  10. Okay I think I've found it. I have to send POC within 14 days of issue date. Foolishly I somehow did NOT 'tick' the box stating I would send detailed particulars to the defendant. Is this going to be a problem and cost me money? I then need to file an N215 Certificate of Service which I will do at the weekend.
  11. Okay. I've now filed using MCOL and it was issued 23/01/18 and will be deemed to be served on the 28th. Do I now send the schedule and POC above to the defendant and also to Northhampton seperately?
  12. Cheers - off to file at court now.
  13. Here are the POC I will file next week if anyonecan agree they look okay. Do I sent to beneficial finance or HSBC? I shall use HSBC terms and conditions having read some thread. New POC Beneficial Finance Claim No [ ] IN THE [xxxxx] county court BETWEEN [Mrs xxxx xxxx] Claimant and - HSBC Defendant PARTICULARS OF CLAIM 1. The Claimant entered into an agreement (“The Agreement”) with the Defendant on or around xx/xx/xxxx, whereby the Defendant was to advance credit facilities to the Claimant under a running credit account, Account no xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx ("The Account"). 2. The Agreement essentially consisted of the Defendant providing the Claimant with a cheque book which would allow the Claimant to make purchases and receive cash advances on credit. In return the Defendant was entitled to charge interest at the published rate. 3. The Agreement was a Regulated Agreement for the purposes of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. At all material times the contract was subject to the Defendant’s standard terms and conditions which could be varied from time to time. Summary 5. Throughout the course of the Agreement, the Defendant has added numerous default charges to the Account for the Claimant’s failure to make the minimum payment on the due date and or for exceeding the credit limit and or if a payment is returned. (Full particulars are set out in schedule 2). 6. The default charges were applied in accordance with the standard terms of The Agreement which were: a) A penalty payable on breach of contract and thus unenforceable: and b) An unfair term under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (“The Regulations”) and therefore not binding on the Claimant. 7. The Claimant is accordingly entitled to repayment of the sums wrongly added to the Account. The Charges 8. The standard Terms of the Agreement in substance provided as follows: (a) The Defendant would provide the Claimant with the cheque book. The Claimant was entitled to use the cheques to make purchases and receive cash advances up to a credit limit (“the Limit”) set by the Defendant. The Defendant could unilaterally change the Limit by giving the Claimant notice in writing. (b) The Defendant was entitled to charge interest on the purchases and cash advances at the published rate. © The Claimant was to pay the minimum payment of 3% of the amount owed or £5 (whichever was the greatest) by the due date as notified in the monthly statements. (d) The default charges August xxxx – September xxxx were £xx.xx, November xxxx – October xxxx was £xx.xx. Penalty 9.The amount of the Charges exceeded any genuine pre-estimate of the damage which would have been suffered by the Bank in relation to the Claimant’s transgressions. 10. In the premises the Charges were punitive and a penalty and thus unenforceable at common law. The Regulations 11.At all material times the Claimant was a consumer within the Regulations. 13. At all material times the terms of the Agreement providing for the Charges were unfair within regulation 5 of the Regulations in that contrary to the requirement of good faith they caused a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations to the detriment of the Claimant. 14. without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will refer to the following matters in support of the contention that the terms are to be assessed as unfair as at the time of the conclusion of the Agreement, and of each revision to the Standard Terms. (1)The terms relating to Charges were standard terms; they would not be individually negotiated. (2)The Charges were a penalty for breach of contract. (3)The Charges exceeded the costs which the Bank could have expected to incur in dealing with the exceeding of the credit limit, late payment or returned payment. (4) Accordingly the Charges were a disproportionate charge incurred by the Claimant for their failure to meet their contractual obligation and thus within the ambit of Schedule 2 (1) (e) of the Regulations and indicative of an unfair term. (5) As the Bank knew, the Charges were of subsidiary importance to the customer in the context of the Agreement as a whole and would not influence the making of the Agreement. (6) As the Defendant knew, the Claimant had no means of assessing the fairness of the Charges. (7) In the premises, the effect of the Charges would be prejudicial to the customer who incurred them, and cause an imbalance in the relations of the parties to the Agreement by subordinating the customer’s interests to those of the Defendant in a way which was inequitable. 15. without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will contend that the terms’ imposing the Charges are not core terms under regulation 6 of the Regulations and relies on the following matters. (1) The assessment of fairness does not relate to terms which define the main or core subject matter of the Agreement. (2) The assessment of fairness does not relate to the adequacy of the price or remuneration as against the goods or services supplied in exchange (in other words, whether or not the relevant services were value for money). (3) The Charges are correctly described as default charges by the Defendant in the key information provided to new customers. 16. By reason of the said matters the terms were not binding under regulation 8 of the Regulations. 17. The Defendant wrongly applied Charges to the Account totalling some £xxx.xx between xx/xx/xxxx and xx/xx/xxxx. Particulars appear from Schedule 2. 18. On xx/xx/xxxx the Claimant demanded repayment of the sums wrongly applied. 19. The Defendant has not repaid them or any of them. And the Claimant claims; (1) A declaration that the sums totalling £xxx.xx have wrongly been applied to the Account. These charges are older than the normal 6 years but are claimed by virtue of s32 (1) c Limitations Act 1980 as per Kleinwort Benson v Lincoln City Council. (2) Payment of the said sum of £xxx.xx and interest in restitution of £xxxx.xx as per Sempra Metals v Inland Revenue Commissioners. (3) Interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 25.9% per annum on the amount claimed (daily rate of £x.xx) until judgment or sooner payment. (4) Court costs of [ xxxx]. I believe that the facts stated in these particulars, comprising of x pages, are true. Dated Signed Schedule 1 Schedule 2
  14. Would it be an idea to mention section32 of the limitations act when I send my LBA
×
×
  • Create New...