Sytra v HSBC (Business Acc) ***WON***

[sytra]

Thankyou Freaky also

 

Forgot to say i tipped BOTH your scales

 

Sytra

[jowalshy]

Starting to become like buses a bit. Nothing happens for a while and then two come along at the same time.

[sytra]

I said i was gonna become more of a regular here... i have a question, no surprise here then i hear you say.

 

Today recieved a letter from "Metroploitan" asking for a list of my disputed transactions so they can forward them onto their client for investigation.

 

I have already forwarded these before to HSBC and got 2 letters back one saying they will offer £145 then another saying they would not negotiate on charges etc.

 

now their time is up on friday and i was gonna start a claim against them, so i think this could just be a delaying tactic from them, should i write back with the info requested, tell them i will give them an extra 7 days to respond then if i dont hear from them just start the claim?

 

The way i am thinking is that if i give them a little bit of leaway then if it does go to court then at least i can show i have been lenient and so hopefully gain the appreciation of the judge.

 

Sytra

[freakyleaky]

Unfortunately showing the court you have been reasonable in you actions seems to hold no sway with the courts what so ever. I would send metropolitan what they are asking for but make a note to them that you have already sent the information to hsbc and you will be starting legal action on friday if you have not received a satisfactory response!

[sytra]

Well another letter this time from HSBC again!!!! apparently we have recieved 2 letters offering the same amount from them (only 1 recieved) and we have not responded (proves they have not read a previous letter stating that we do not accept the offer)

 

So this morning i get another letter offering £145 as F+F

 

Think i might accept this as a part settlement this time, but they seem a little rattled as they state the test case and personal accounts etc then go onto say that business claims could be used in the case, the way they are wording things is totally different and sounds uncertain.. a turnaround from their first letter.

 

Sytra

[Audreygreeneyes]

hmmmm sounds as if the wheels are coming off the wagon!!!! think thye have only got 3 on at the moment:)

 

whilst it is good news they have offered you something, the whole lot would be better........

 

make sure that you clearly define the period you are accepting this for......... ie 01.01.2007-10.02.2007 and that is is only part payment..

 

oh have they taken out the confidentialy clause??

[freakyleaky]

I think there is a template letter somewhere for accepting an offer as part payment. Can you remember where it is Auders?

[Audreygreeneyes]

yes there is one but god its so so long ago, will ahve a look see if I can find anything ........

[Audreygreeneyes]

Date

Dear Whoever

Ref: Your Offer of Settlement

 

Account: xxxxxxxx

Sort Code xx-xx-xx

Claim No: XXXXX in XXXX County Court

 

I acknowledge receipt of your letter date xx/xx/xx and your settlement offer of £XXX

 

I accept your offer as full and final settlement only for this claim of bank charges made on my account between xx/xx/xx and xx/xx/xx(dates of first and last charge)

 

I accept this offer without prejudice and I reserve the right to make any further claims should you apply future charges that may be considered unlawful under common law or in violation of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 or Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

 

I will be willing to withdraw my claim upon receipt of unconditional full settlement of my claim.

 

I am also not prepared to agree to any confidentially clauses you try to impose, unless of course your client wishes to make an offer of due consideration in addition to the amount of £xxxxx, in order to be afforded this privilege by myself.

 

I trust that you will find this arrangement acceptable.

 

Yours Sincerely

[Audreygreeneyes]

change the full and final part to PART SETTLEMENT...........

 

 

you will be willing to withdraw the clainm on cleared funds paid to you.........

[Audreygreeneyes]

that the one you were after Freaky? had to trawl through loads of stuff on this pc............lol

 

sytra if you need any more help tweaking it jsut shout........... and well done Auds

[sytra]

Well got a letter this morning from DG Solicitors, all the usuall whaffle, the letter from them is saying we have been instructed to take legal action unless we pay xxxxx, this was dated 1st Jan.... so they work new years day then first solicitor i know to do that...

 

yet we also get a letter dated 3rd Jan from HSBC offering a settlement?? needless to say i am confused...

 

I need to stall DG as we are at last filing our claim tomorrow and dont want DG to do anything regards this account from their end ie them file a claim first. any ideas????

 

just one other question

 

Do DG have to be registered with the law society? as i cant find them listed prob me looking in wrong place...

 

Sytra

[jowalshy]

I think that DG are in house solicitors and solely deal with HSBC. whether they still have to be registered as well I don't know.

 

I am not sure as to how long it takes DG to file a claim their end and they may have already done so.

[Castlebest]

Hiya Sytra, its long been obvious that HSBC Leeds and DG solicitors don't actually talk to each other which answers why you get a repayment demand from DG and a settlement offer from HSBC .

 

I wouldn't worry about DG filing a claim against you if your filing your claim tomorrow if they have filed a claim you will get a form asking you if you intend to defend their claim all you have to say is yes and send in a copy of your POC including your own county court claim number as your defence within 28 days . If you still want to delay DG then try sending them a copy of HSBC's offer letter and ask them what they are talking about .

 

I'm not sure about registration of DG, they are an operational practice of solicitors so I don't see why they should be excused registration.

 

good luck

 

pete

[sytra]

Ok, well filed claim against HSBC finally on 29th Jan they have now defended. so just got to wait and see what their defence is.

 

But today got a letter from DG Solicitors dated 9th Feb, addressed to a business at our address, we opened it as we were unable to see the name just the address but glad we did as it is highly unusuall, besides we knew who it was from by the postcode on the back of envelope.

 

It states:

Dear Sir

Name: xxxxxx xxxxxx (my wifes name)

last known address: our address (the one they sent this letter to)

 

we act for clients who wish to contact the above named person

 

from our records it would appear that they were at one time in your employ (she has never been employed or even linked with the area in question)

Please answer the questions below

 

1, i/we confirm that the above named is/is no longer in our employ

2, i/we confirm that their address is shown above or is as follows

3, i/we confirm we will/will not pass on future correspondence

 

If the letter had been sent to the correct place they would have had all details ie name, address and account number, besides it could have potentially caused embarrasment as they would have known solicitors were trying to get hold of her.

 

Any ideas what they are playing at?

are they allowed to go on a fishing trip like this, especially as it is going through court?

 

Sytra

[Castlebest]

Hiya Sytra thats very odd, does your wife have a separate account with HSBC or one of the HSBC companies like First Direct? I cant think why they would send you a letter like that.

 

from our records it would appear that they were at one time in your employ (she has never been employed or even linked with the area in question)

 

Get your wife to call them or write to them asking where they get their information.

 

pete

[sytra]

No she has no other accounts with them.. cant really call them as the letter was addressed to someone else.

 

Sytra

[Castlebest]

someone else at your address?... has someone else ever been at your address?

 

pete

[sytra]

Yes it was addressed to a private school at our address, have checked on the net and it is a school in bournemouth.

 

The reason we opened it was that we reckognised the postcode on the envelope, and we could only see the address not a name, so just assumed it was for my wife....

 

There was someone at our address bt that was years ago, we have been here for 4 yrs, the old people before us were here for 10 yrs, the guy that owns the house lives in wales and hong kong.

 

so confused

 

Sytra

[Castlebest]

I'm confused too, I cant see why they would try to contact your wife through a previous employer when they have your address, I can see no point in writing the letter they have sent.

 

pete

[sytra]

Pleae can someone take a look at this letter i intend to take to the court on monday.

 

Started a claim against HSBC they acknowledged and had until 26th Feb to file a defence, we sent a judgment by default as we heard nothing from them on the last thing on the 26th.

 

Then this morning got a letter from the court saying claim is stayed, the judges words "i am not prepared to assume that the outcome of the action presently before the higher court will not bear upon or offer guidance on the issues to be joined in this case. The action is accordingly stayed"

 

I intend to take this letter to the court first thing monday, in the hopes that the judge will lift the stay without having to pay, i borrowed the letter above.

 

 

I write with reference to your letter dated 27th Feb 2008 in which you state the case I have brought against HSBC is being stayed.

 

I would respectfully bring your attention to the fact that as this is a small business claim the current OFT test case has no bearing on this case, I am not claiming as per UTCCR which is the reason behind the OFT’s case, this is clearly stated in my particulars of claim.

 

I would also like to draw your attention to the following statement issued by the FSA, in particular the paragraph on page 2 which is highlighted in red:

 

FSA publishes review of 'waiver' on the handling of complaints in relation to unauthorised overdraft charges

 

 

FSA/PN/119/2007

21 November 2007

The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has completed its review of the 'waiver' of its complaints handling rules in the context of unauthorised overdraft charges. The waiver removes the obligation to deal with unauthorised overdraft charges complaints in the time specified under FSA rules. The FSA has concluded that the waiver is operating effectively and can remain in place.

The waiver was granted on 27 July 2007 to support the test case on unauthorised overdraft charges brought in the High Court by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT). The purpose of the test case is to bring certainty on whether these charges are fair and lawful. The waiver requires complaints to be put on hold until certainty is established and complaints about these charges can be dealt with consistently and fairly. The FSA pledged to review the waiver after two months.

Following detailed examinations of firms' compliance with the conditions of the waiver and extensive consultations with consumer groups and other stakeholders, the FSA has established that the waiver is meeting its four key requirements:

· An effective stay of proceedings in the courts of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland is in place;

· The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) is likewise staying cases about unauthorised overdraft charges;

· Firms granted the waiver are complying with its conditions, including the need for clear communications with customers and appropriate handling of financial difficulty cases; and

· The continuation of the waiver remains appropriate to assist the test case.

Clive Briault, FSA Managing Director, Retail Markets, said:

"The test case between the OFT and the firms is a crucial step in establishing certainty about the legality and fairness of unauthorised overdraft charges. When this certainty has been established complaints about unauthorised overdraft charges can be dealt with consistently and fairly.

"The waiver we granted in July allowed firms to put complaints about unauthorised overdraft charges on hold until these complaints could be dealt with consistently and fairly. But it was important to review the operation of this waiver to ensure that it was working as intended. Our thorough review shows that it is appropriate for the waiver to remain in place.”

Particular concerns had been raised during the review period about the position under the waiver of complainants who may be in financial difficulty. The FSA is satisfied that the relevant part of the waiver is being complied with. However, in view of the importance of this issue, the FSA will carry out further work, in conjunction with the Banking Code Standards Board (BCSB), to check that firms continue to provide appropriate treatment of consumers in genuine financial difficulty.

The waiver review confirms that it remains appropriate for the waiver to continue to apply to consumers in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

The review has also clarified the status of small business accounts, which are not covered by the waiver. The FSA has agreed with the firms arrangements to ensure small business customers are not disadvantaged.

In the course of the review the FSA found that a number of firms had changed their terms and conditions in relation to unauthorised overdraft charges. In the waiver, each firm agreed 'it will not make materially adverse changes in the level of its unauthorised overdraft charges (or in ways that it applies such charges to its customers' accounts) which could amount to customer abuse'. The FSA will be closely monitoring how any change made by a firm will affect customers in practice and whether this amounts to a breach of the waiver.

The test case is expected to start in January 2008.

 

As you can see in the eyes of the FSA and myself this case should not have been stayed, I would also like to point out that as HSBC (DG Solicitors) are well aware of the fact that this case has no relation whatsoever to the current OFT case.

 

I respectfully request that you sincerely look again at this case.

 

Yours Faithfully

Any ideas or feedback?

[sytra]

Ok do DG have any idea what they are playing at?

 

Even though we have a claim going through against them at the moment they have sent another letter this morning saying

 

"unless an immediate payment is made, we will be instructing Debt Collectors to employ other methods of recovery, which may include calls at your address"

"If you are able to raise £xxx from other sources, our clients would be prepared to accept this as Full & Final, provided payment is made within 10 days"

Now i thought that:

 

1) while a claim was in court (even though just been stayed) they couldnt carry on collection activity?

2) It was aginst the law to ask you to raise the funds from other sources (as i read it they are asking us to borrow money to pay them)

 

The value they will accept as F&F is virtually the same as i am claiming back give or take a couple of £....

 

???????????????????????? DG

 

Sytra

[freakyleaky]

As it has not been proved that the ammount they are claiming from you is made up of unlawful charges they will see it as a legitimate claim for an outstanding debt regardless of any action you are taking against them.

 

But the short answer is NO they don't know what they are doing half the time.

 

Give them a ring or write them a letter telling them that you will clear the outstanding debt once they have returned your charges.

[sytra]

The saga continues.....................

 

Today (22/3) received a letter from Central Debt Recovery demading total amount or doorstep representative will call... thing is letter was dated 13th March giving us till 21st to pay money the money we are claiming from them.

 

also tried to get the stay on the claim lifted but with no luck, the judge is adamant that the outcome of the test case "will have a direct relation to business claims"

 

Sytra

[Castlebest]

Hiya Sytra, HSBC should not have sold this debt to central debt recovery while it is in dispute.

 

Write back to CDR and tell them that the debt is subject to a county court claim that has been stayed, give them the claim number also have a look at this thread regarding threats of doorstep recovery.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/125577-metropolitan-collection-services-action.html

 

pete