Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'dg solicitors'.
Found 3 results
Received a County Court Summons from Solicitors today for an invoice from one of my suppliers. I can't pay this back in one lump sum. Bank wanted a ludicrous amount a week, so they said, hang fire, it'll go to our solicitors, and they will be able to resolve this and offer you a more agreeable repayment offer. Went to solicitors, I called them a few times. No response. But rather than get in touch in any way, they've simply started legal proceedings against me. Is there anything I can do at this point to waive the legal proceedings and get back to a repayment plan?
I have an interesting (I hope) story to share with my fellow CAG's: I had an account with HSBC Bank International Ltd (the "Bank") at the Isle of Man for many years. In 2009 / 2010 the account was at its overdraft limit. I had a direct debit to a HSBC branded life insurance policy (Aviva was the underwriter, it was just HSBC branded). The Bank bounced my DD to the insurance. I receive a letter in the post stating the policy is null and void becausre of the returned DD. I speak to Aviva, yes the policy is now dead. I speak to another insurance co and obtain replacement life cover. The Bank meanwhile reinstitutes the DD and takes the money for the next two months before I notice. I speak to Aviva again, no they cannot and did not restart a DD and yes the policy is dead (all via a written letter). So if I didn't start the DD again and Aviva didn't that only leaves HSBC! I get very angry with HSBC, scream and shout at them. They respond by returning the money they stole and state that the matter is now closed! My view: they stole my money, sure they gave it back but they need to do a lot more to make the problem go away; imagine if roles were reversed! In Q3 2010 DG Solicitors sue me via Nothampton CC. I put in my defense pointing out that the Claimant is not HSBC Bank plc but rather HSBC Bank International Limited plus that the Bank pinhed my pocket and needs to do more than return my money. 33 days go by and the Bank does not respond so the claim is stayed. In December 2012 the Bank applies to Nothampton to strike out my defense under CPR 3.4(2) and applies for summary judgement. Among other statements by the Bank is that HSBC Bank International Ltd does not and has never existed. Northampton grants the stay being lifted (27 months after the claim), strikes out my defense and transfers the claim to my local court. The first thing I hear of this is the notice from Northampton that my defense has been struck out and the application for summary judgemnt transferred to my local court. I apply to my local court to set aside the decision of Notrthampton and to find the applicant (DG is HSBC and vice versa) guilty or perjury as HSBC Bank International Limited does exist! Now I have a hearing in mid February to reverse Northampton. My view is to attach CPR 3.4(2) because the Claimant waited 27 months contrary Practise Direction 23 that it is done "as soon as possible". I attack lifting the stay because the delay has prejudiced my position as I need to rebuild my case after 27 months. The perjury / contempt of court: the claimant obviously knows where my account was held and obviously knows the jurisdicton. That it lied to Northampton so as to obtain the decision it did is prima facie evidence of perjury / contempt of court. Please give me your views of the foregoing!
Hi everyone, this is my first post so please be gentle I am in the process of filing an amended defence regarding unenforceable CCA 1974 agreement and require advice on the matter. The story so far is that I originally filed an embarrassed defence due to DG Solicitors not supplying documents that related to HSBC claim for £12,000 on a Gold Card. HSBC did not take any further action and the case was stayed. They then recently applied for the stay to be lifted and judgement entered for them as, in their opinion, I had no chance of winning. I appeared at court yesterday and contested their application on the grounds that I have not received a default notice and requested it be struck out. The district judge on reading my witness statement denied summary judgement and re allocated the case to fast track. I now have to file another defence to their claim and was wondering on what basis I should defend post Carey v HSBC. I was originally going to claim that the CCA does not contain the prescribed terms but am now unsure (there is no mention of APR on CCA). DG Solicitors have admitted that they cannot supply a copy of the default notice as they do not keep records of electronic documents. Their agent at court seems to think that she can rely on a reconstituted copy (she showed me a blank template) Advice greatly appreciated