Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good Law Project are trying to force HMG to release details of how Sunak's hedge fund made large profits from Moderna. Government ordered to disclose Sunak’s hedge fund emails - Good Law Project GOODLAWPROJECT.ORG Good Law Project has won a battle with the Treasury after it tried to suppress emails between Rishi Sunak and the hedge fund he founded.  
    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

they owe us £1645!!! - received 1st standard reply


ANNALH
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6596 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hello,

 

We sent a letter to HSBC yesterday by recorded delivery claiming £1645 for just over 2 years of charges and gave them 14 days to respond.

It is a joint account we have held for around 4 years and for the first 3 years they were throwing loans, overdrafts and savings accounts at us. For the last year to date they have started being very mean to us, refusing to give us anything, even though they were our main bank and we had lots of money going into our account. Unfortunately we cannot close our current account as we have a loan with them which has to be repaid from this current account, so we now use another bank for all our day to day banking and just keep HSBC open to pay loan each month.

I suspect they were a little annoyed when they got the letter this morning, but then we have been annoyed with them for a long time, so roll on the time when we can close our account and have nothing more to do with them (not before we get all our charges refunded though!!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had my first reply letter from HSBC today (17th). Which is exactly 1 week after they received my letters (i actually sent 3, one to Canada Sq, London, 1 to local branch, 1 to address in Sheffield I got off this site).

 

Its just the standard...'we are investigating'...letter, but does not say when they will write back, only 'when I have completed my investigations'. They also enclosed a helpful leaflet, which I had specifically asked them NOT to send!

 

They have 7 days to conclude their investigations and refund my money or I start court proceedings.

 

The clock is ticking!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

So, received 2nd standard reply from Phil Beaumont 'Senior Service Quality Officer' no less!!

basically no more helpful than the first reply I had, spouting clauses in their terms and conditions, 'clause 7.11 section 2.', their charges are fair and are clearly stated in their published price list, blah blah blah.'

 

This letter came the day after I went onto MCOL and filed a claim, I received the notice of issue from the court today so hopefully that means the bank should have received their letter from the court today too.

 

Lets see what they do now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't allow yourself to be silenced. This is a breach of your civil rights - don't let them get away with it.

 

You will still get your money.

If you feel that we have helped you, or you would like to help keep this web site running so that others can continue to get their money back, please click the donate button at the top of the forum.

Advice & opinions of Dave, The Bank Action Group and The Consumer Action Group are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability.

Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any doubts.

 

------------

 

 

Add me as your friend on FaceBook - I need all the friends I can get :-(

 

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=577405151

 

------------

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

HSBC have just acknowledged my court claim (03/04/06), havent even had the docs from the court yet when I get a letter from DG Solicitors offering me a full refund in exchange for confidentiality!

 

Success!!!

 

 

so glad I read this, got my letter from Phil Beaumont this morning. The only thing that worried me is I am currently £1000 OD (interest free as I'm now a student), and I think they might try bully me into paying it back. But I am going to carry on and start court proceedings. I'm only claiming £933!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have received my letter today from Phil Beaumont with an offer of £420 which is nowhere near what the actual charges have been which is closer to £2500. He has also sent me a document to sign stating I will accept that this under no circumstances admits guilt on behalf of HSBC and that I will finish my claim there.

 

I am fully intent on now taking this through the courts but does anyone know if the 'settlement of goodwill' will go against me in the courts? and should I now notify HSBC that this offer has not been accepted and I intend court action or just move the process forward?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha - Sanrich, what Seminole means is:

 

Start your own thread. It makes it easier for us to follow your progress.

 

If you are serious about getting your money back - and by being here, it shows you are, then if you start your own thread (don't be shy ) - then your case wil be looked at and encouraged by people that have been through the same thing.

 

It's just much easier to follow that way.

 

The thing is, there are only 10 of us who are constant Admins, or mods (with over 11k members), and it's really quite hard to follow everyones case (and offer advice, encouragement) if they are buried in other peoples.

 

Sometimes it gets to all of us, but hey, that's life.

 

Stick with it, don't be put off - you WILL get your money back!

 

Don't accept their first offer - if you were selling something at auction, you wouldn't take the first bid if you had a choice - you'd hold on for the full amount.

 

Do the same here - you WILL get your money, and why shouldn't you?

 

They have taken it by means of penalty for breach of contract - this is not allowed under English law - if we have to abide by English law, then why shouldn't they?

 

They have taken advantage of the fact that people think that banks can be trusted - they have shown, time and time again that this is not the case.

 

Stick by your guns. And when you get your money back - shout it to everyone and anyone that will listen.

If you feel that we have helped you, or you would like to help keep this web site running so that others can continue to get their money back, please click the donate button at the top of the forum.

Advice & opinions of Dave, The Bank Action Group and The Consumer Action Group are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability.

Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any doubts.

 

------------

 

 

Add me as your friend on FaceBook - I need all the friends I can get :-(

 

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=577405151

 

------------

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 03/06/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6596 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...