Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes, Hotpoint UK has been a subsidiary of Whirlpool for over 20 years. And unlike some domestic goods manufacturers you can buy from them direct and I believe they employ their own service engineers, Is that your situation? You bought direct from Hotpoint and Hotpoint sent out their own engineer?
    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
  • 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
      • 160 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

HSBC A/c & NCO europe default


pblackie
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5838 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

My Bank charges claim is currently on hold due to the current court case, The account was defaulted by HSBC several years ago and virtually the whole sum is made up of bank charges that I am reclaiming. I have just carried out a credit search and discovered that NCO have a default registered against me for the account ( I Vaguely remember them sending me a letter a few years ago) although nothing from HSBC. Can anyone suggest how I should go about getting this default removed please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi pblackie, just bumping you to the top of the pile so that someone can help you with the default.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]If you think my post was helpful, please feel free to click my scales

 

 

A prudent question is one-half of wisdom.

 

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

An Interesting twist to the tale. I have spoken to HSBC who have confirmed that they told NCO about the dispute and that NCO have put the account on hold, I also spoke to NCO who confirmed that the acccount is on hold. Yesterday I received a County Court Claim form from IND for the same account????

 

Again spoke to NCO who inform me that yes the account is on hold due to the amount being in dispute and that they had told IND this and not to take any action.

 

Any advice as to how to deal with this bunch of Muppets (although I'm sure using that term in this context is probably doing the Muppet fraternity a dis-service).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Pete, I will defend it.

 

Just spoken to D&G Solicitors who have informed me that they have been in contact with NCO asking why this action has been taken when the account is in dispute. NCO have told them that their parent company (FV-1/Morgan Stanley) have an arrangement with HSBC wherby they can pursue the undisputed amount of an account that is in dispute ie if the balance was £10 pounds and i was claiming £5 in unfair charges they are allowed to pursue the remaining £5.

 

In my mind this raises 3 questions:

1) I thought DCA's were not allowed to pursue disputed accounts under OFT guidelines, if this is the case can they pursue the undisputed portion of a disputed account?

2) if they they are only pursuing the undisputed amount why does the calim form demand the full account balance?

3) should I now take further action with my charges claim and issue court proceedings against HSBC which (although they will be stayed) will enable me to add Stat interest to the account which will, in turn almost remove the balance between my claim and the Balance of the account.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi pblackie - you're in good hands with pete and jo there......:)

 

I'll stick my two pennorth in for what it's worth.......

 

1.

NCO have told them that their parent company (FV-1/Morgan Stanley) have an arrangement with HSBC wherby they can pursue the undisputed amount of an account that is in dispute

 

I don't think banks can make this arrangement between themselves - it's not up to them - if an account is in dispute they can't pursue it - simple as that!

 

2. They put the full amount in because they think you don't know the rules - and they can't pursue part of a disputed claim....

 

3. I would go ahead and issue proceedings- it'll get you in the system and as you say you can claim the interest and reduce the balance owing and increase the disputed amount........so how do they know which part is disputed....:D

 

Best of Luck

Just follow pete's & jo's lead.........

 

Oops sorry pete- didn't realise you were back on line - would you agree with the above?

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I believe they are breaching OFT guidelines and added to that, until your queries have been answered the amount you owe HSBC (if anything) is not known so how can they collect an unknown balance? finally if they have issued the writ for the full amount they are ignoring your dispute totally.

 

there is no point issuing a county court claim now they have done this for you, the case will now go to court which is what you want (or get stayed) and they have wasted their own money so just use the defence I did for giants as your defence template :).

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah - you're right pete - if they've already issued a claim against pblackie - he doesn't have to bother - but I assume he can rack up the interest just the same ?

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe once your in court there is no real difference between claimant and defendant, the winner wins, and if you win it means that HSBC owe you the value of your claim and the county courts act interest too regardless of who issued the writ :)

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for clearing that up ,pete .........:)

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pete, Just to clarify things in my own mind. As NCO/IND have issued the proceedings against me as the new owners of the account does that mean before the Judge can make a ruling on their claim he has to make a ruling on my bank charges claim against HSBC? If so I think there are going to be a few people at HSBC touch peeved with NCO/IND. If that is the case they have actually done me a favour my taking the action they have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya, if you look at what I wrote for Giants you will see what I have done is basically accepted what the claimant has said about the account (total balance figure etc) but then, by using the standard particulars of claim as part of the defence detailed why you don't think you are liable.

 

In other words defended with a counter claim, if this gets to court the judge would have to consider your evidence, this in effect gets your claim into court with the added bonus that the bank, or at least one of their lackeys have done it to themselves :D.

 

I don't personally think the bank would risk doing this and it is likely they will ask for a stay of their own case or settle with you.

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI Pete, This is what I think the defence should look like having cut and pasted as suggested:

 

 

Claim No XXXXXXX

IN THE [enter your local] COUNTY COURT

 

BETWEEN

[THE CLAIMANT]

Claimant

and

[YOUR NAME]

Defendant

 

PARTICULARS OF DEFENCE

The Defendant agrees that by an agreement made in writing between HSBC Bank PLC (the Assignor) and the Defendant dated XX.XX.1983 (the Agreement) the Assignor agreed to provide the Defendant with current account facilities upon the terms and conditions set out therein and to include an overdraft facility.

The Defendant has used the said account such that the balance did exceed the agreed overdraft limit from time to time. Because of this, the Assignor has also deducted funds from the account in respect of penalty charges to a sum (see Schedule 2) in excess of the current overdrawn balance of the account which the defendant believes is unlawful under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 and also at common law.

The Defendant wishes to draw the courts attention to the true material facts of this claim which are as follows;

1. Since about [Enter the date of opening the account] the Claimant and the Defendant (“the Bank”) have agreed (“the Banking Contract”) that the Bank would operate for the Claimant an account, number [xxxxxxxx], ("the Account") at the [xxxxxxxxx] branch of the Defendant bank.

2. The Account was a current account, under which, at all material times, in substance:

(1) the Bank agreed to hold monies deposited by or for the Claimant, and to make payments to and on behalf of the Claimant;

(2) in return, the Bank was entitled to the use of the monies so deposited, and to be paid interest on monies borrowed by the Claimant.

3. At all material times the Account was subject to the Bank's standard terms and conditions ("the Standard Terms"). The Standard Terms were varied from time to time when the Bank issued revised terms.

Summary

4. The Bank has debited charges from the Account in respect of unauthorised overdrafts and unpaid items, relying on terms of the Banking Contract which were either:

(1) a penalty payable on breach of contract and unenforceable at common law and/or

(2) unfair terms within the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 (The Regulations”) and unenforceable.

The Claimant is accordingly entitled to repayment of the sums wrongly debited and interest.

The Charges

5. At all material times, the Standard Terms, as revised, provided as follows (the best particulars the Claimant can give pending disclosure are set out in Schedule 1).

(1) The Claimant would enjoy free banking for everyday services while in credit, and instant access to the money in the Account

(2) If the Claimant arranged an overdraft with the Bank, the Bank would charge interest at the rate applicable to a prearranged overdraft, at certain charging dates.

(3) Until 1 December 2006 the Standard Terms provided that, if the Claimant did not agree with the Bank a sufficient overdraft to meet the payment of a cheque, direct debit or other item, in advance of it being presented to the Bank for payment from the Account, and the Bank paid that item, and as a consequence the Account went into overdraft, or further into overdraft:

a. the Claimant was in breach of the Banking Contract,

b. the Claimant must immediately pay sufficient money into the Account to put the Account into credit, taking account of interest and charges.

c. the Bank would be entitled to charge interest at a standard higher rate of interest than the rate for a prearranged overdraft and a fee (“the Unauthorised Borrowing Fee”). The fee was £25 .

(4) if the Bank returned a cheque, direct debit or standing order or other item unpaid, the Bank would be entitled to a fee in respect of each item (an “Unpaid Item Fee”). The Unpaid Item Fee was £30.

(5) Since 1 December 2006 the Standard Terms have changed so as to provide that, in the circumstances referred to above:

a. the Claimant would be treated as informally requesting an overdraft without having agreed an overdraft in advance, and,

b. if the Bank agreed to it, the Bank would provide an overdraft or an increase in an overdraft limit to cover the item concerned for 31 days.

c. If the Bank paid the item, the Bank would be entitled to charge the Unauthorised Borrowing Fee. The Unauthorised Borrowing Fee is currently £25 (or the amount of the unauthorised overdraft if less, with no more than one charge per day).

d. if the Bank returned a cheque, standing order or other item unpaid, the Bank would charge an Unpaid Item Fee. The Unpaid Item Fee is currently £25 for items over £25 in value, and £10 for items over £10 but less than £25 in value.

Penalty

6. The Unauthorised Borrowing Fee payable until 1 December 2006 was payable on breach of contract by the Claimant.

7. The amount of the said Unauthorised Borrowing Fee exceeded any genuine pre-estimate of the damage which would be suffered by the Bank in dealing with a request for an unauthorised overdraft.

8. In the premises until 1 December 2006 the Unauthorised Borrowing Fee was were punitive and a penalty and unenforceable.

The Regulations

9. At all material times the Claimant was a consumer within the Regulations.

10. At all material times the terms of the Banking Contract 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 under the Banking Contract.

11. 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 Banking Contact, and of each revision to the Standard Terms.

(1) Until 1 December 2006 the Unauthorised Borrowing Fee was a penalty for breach of contract.

(2) The Charges exceeded the costs which the Bank could have expected to incur in dealing with unauthorised borrowing and/or an unpaid item. They would cover to an extent the cost of providing banking to other customers who did not incur the Charges.

(3) The Charges could be imposed repeatedly, with interest at the Higher Rate of Interest charged on top.

(4) The cumulative effect of the above would be to increase the debt burden on the customer who incurred Charges, and make it more likely that a further fee and interest would be charged.

(5) The Charges would penalise the customer who had little or no credit. The customer who incurred Charges was likely to be the least able to afford to pay the charge.

(6) The terms relating to Charges were standard terms; they would not be individually negotiated.

(7) As the Bank knew, the Charges were of subsidiary importance to the customer in the context of the Banking Contract as a whole and would not influence the making of the Banking Contract.

(8) As the Bank knew, the customer had no means of assessing the fairness of the Charges.

(9) 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 Banking Contract by subordinating the customer’s interests to those of the Bank in a way which was inequitable.

12. Without prejudice to the burden of proof, the Claimant will contend that regulation 6 of the Regulations does not apply to the terms for the Charges, 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 Banking Contract (which is set out in paragraph 3 above).

(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). Until 1 December 2006 the Unauthorised Borrowing Fee was unfair because it was a penalty for breach of contract. Further or alternatively, regulation 6 only applied to services which were the core subject matter of the contract, which did not include the Charges. Further or alternatively, the Charges were unfair because of their operation and effect as set out in the preceding paragraph, not because they were not value for money.

13. By reason of the said matters the terms were not binding under regulation 8 of the Regulations.

14. The Bank wrongly debited the Account with Charges totalling some £1,225.50 between a5th June 2002 and 26th February 2004 Particulars appear from Schedule 2.

15. On 11th June 2007 the Client demanded repayment of the sums wrongly debited.

16. The defendant has not repaid them or any of them.

And the Claimant claims

(1) A declaration that the sums totalling £1,225.50 have wrongly been debited from the Account

(2) Payment of the said sum of £1,225.50. charged by the Bank thereon.

(3) Interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of wrongful debit to date in the sum of £1661.23, and at the daily rate of xx.until judgment or sooner payment.

(4) Further or other relief.

 

I believe the facts stated in these particulars, comprising of x pages are true.

 

Dated…………………….

 

 

Signed …………………..

 

 

SCHEDULE 1

Standard terms of HSBC Bank plc

 

 

 

Pre 2002

“7.1 You must always keep your current account in credit unless we have agreed an overdraft with you.

7.2 If an overdraft is agreed, the interest rate will be shown in a letter that sets out the terms of the overdraft.

7.3 You must not go over any overdraft limit that is agreed with us unless you get our agreement first.

7.7 If we pay a cheque or other item you issue and, as a result, your account goes overdrawn or goes over your agreed limit, this does not mean that we have agreed an overdraft or an increased limit. You must immediately pay enough money into your account to cover the overdrawn amount or the amount that is over your agreed limit.

7.8 If your account goes overdrawn without an agreed overdraft, or you go over an agreed overdraft limit, we will charge you our Standard Debit Interest Rate on the amount by which your account is overdrawn.

7.9 As well as charging interest for unauthorised overdrafts, we may also charge a fee to cover the costs of the administration involved (see the relevant price list).”

 

 

From 2002

“7.1 You should always keep your Bank Account in credit unless we have agreed an overdraft with you…

7.3 If an overdraft is agreed on your account, the interest rate will be shown in a letter that sets out the terms of the overdraft.

7.4 You must not go over any overdraft limit that is agreed with us unless you get our agreement first.

7.7 We may decide not to pay a cheque or other item or to allow a card transaction if it would make your account go overdrawn or, .. it would go overdrawn without an agreed overdraft limit or over any agreed overdraft limit. In respect of Bank Accounts this would include standing orders, Direct Debits or bill payments which you had previously instructed us to make or Switch transactions you have made. If this happens, we may charge our fee for returned items.

7.9 If we pay a cheque or other item you issue, allow a card transactions or make any other payment on previous instructions from you and, as a result, your account goes overdrawn or, for Bank Accounts it goes overdrawn without an agreed overdraft or goes over any agreed overdraft limit, this does not mean that we have agreed an overdraft or an increased limit. You must immediately pay enough money into your account to cover the overdrawn amount or the amount that is over your agreed limit..

7.10 If your account goes overdrawn, or for Bank Accounts, it goes overdrawn without an agreed overdraft or goes over any agreed overdraft limit, we may charge interest at our Standard Debit Interest Rate on the amount by which your account is overdrawn or the overdraft limit is exceeded.

7.13 As well as charging interest under 7.10 we may also charge our applicable fee for overdrafts not agreed in advance for any statement period when your Bank Account is overdrawn without an agreed overdraft or goes over any agreed overdraft limit, whether for one day or more, to cover our management and administration costs (see the relevant price list).”

 

 

From 2003

“7.1 You should always keep your Bank Account in credit unless we have agreed an overdraft with you…

7.3 If an overdraft is agreed on your account, the interest rate will be shown in a letter that sets out the terms of the overdraft.

7.4 You must not go over any overdraft limit that is agreed with us unless you get our agreement first.

7.7We may decide not to pay a cheque or other item or to allow a card transaction if it would make your account go overdrawn or, .. it would go overdrawn without an agreed overdraft limit or over any agreed overdraft limit. In respect of Bank Accounts this would include standing orders, Direct Debits or bill payments which you had previously instructed us to make or Switch/Maestro transactions you have made. If this happens, we may charge our fee for returned items.

7.9 If we pay a cheque or other item you issue, allow a card transactions or make any other payment on previous instructions from you and, as a result, your account goes overdrawn or, for Bank Accounts it goes overdrawn without an agreed overdraft or goes over any agreed overdraft limit, this does not mean that we have agreed an overdraft or an increased limit. You must immediately pay enough money into your account to cover the overdrawn amount or the amount that is over your agreed limit..

7.10 We may charge interest at our Standard Overdraft Rate whenever your account .. goes overdrawn on the amount by which your account is overdrawn…

7.13 As well as charging interest under 7.10 we may also charge our applicable fee for reviewing overdrafts not agreed in advance on each occasion that your Bank Account goes overdrawn, or further overdrawn, without an agreed overdraft. We may also charge this fee when your Bank Account goes over, or further over, any agreed overdraft limit. The fee is to cover our management and administration costs (see the relevant price list for details of this fee).

7.15 As well as charging interest under 7.10 and the applicable fee as set out under clause 7.13 above, if we pay a cheque which has been guaranteed by your Switch/Maestro debit card or a Switch/Maestro transaction you have made and as a result, your Bank Account goes overdrawn or goes overdrawn without an agreed overdraft limit or over any agreed overdraft limit, we may also charge you our guaranteed payments fee .”

 

 

From 2004

“7.1 You should always keep your Bank Account in credit unless we have agreed an overdraft with you…

7.3 If an overdraft is agreed on your account, the interest rate will be shown in a letter that sets out the terms of the overdraft.

7.4 You should always stay within an agreed overdraft limit unless you get our agreement to increase this first.

7.7We may decide not to pay a cheque or other item or to allow a card transaction if it would make your account go overdrawn or, .. it would go overdrawn without an agreed overdraft limit or over any agreed overdraft limit. In respect of Bank Accounts this would include standing orders, Direct Debits or bill payments which you had previously instructed us to make or Switch/Maestro transactions you have made. If this happens, we may charge our fee for returned items.

7.9 If we pay a cheque or other item you issue, allow a card transactions or make any other payment on previous instructions from you and, as a result, your account goes overdrawn or, for Bank Accounts it goes overdrawn without an agreed overdraft or goes over any agreed overdraft limit, this does not mean that we have agreed an overdraft or an increased limit. You must immediately pay enough money into your account to cover the overdrawn amount or the amount that is over your agreed limit..

7.10 We may charge interest at our Standard Overdraft Rate whenever your account .. goes overdrawn on the amount by which your account is overdrawn…

7.13 As well as charging interest under clause 7.10 we may also charge our applicable fee for reviewing overdrafts not agreed in advance on each occasion that your Bank Account goes overdrawn, or further overdrawn, without an agreed overdraft. We may also charge this fee when your Bank Account goes over, or further over, any agreed overdraft limit. The fee is to cover our management and administration costs (see the relevant price list for details of this fee).”

7.15 As well as charging interest under 7.10 and the applicable fee as set out under clause 7.13 above, if we pay a cheque which has been guaranteed by your Maestro debit card or a Maestro transaction you have made and, as a result, your Bank Account goes overdrawn or goes overdrawn without an agreed overdraft limit or aver any agreed overdraft limit, we may also charge you our guaranteed payments fee .”

 

 

From 2005

“7.3 You must keep your Bank Account .. in credit unless we have agreed an overdraft.

7.4 We will give you a letter setting out the terms of any agreed overdraft. You must stay within the agreed limit.

7.6. We may charge interest at our Standard Overdraft Rate whenever your account .. goes overdrawn, on the amount by which it is overdrawn…

7.11 Unauthorised overdrafts

As well as charging interest under clause 7.6 we may also charge our applicable fee for reviewing unauthorised overdrafts each time your Bank Account .. goes overdrawn, or further overdrawn, without an agreed overdraft. We may also charge this fee when your Bank Account goes over, or further over, any agreed overdraft limit.

7.13 Our Overdraft Review fee is to cover our management and administration costs…

7.16 We may not pay a cheque or other item or to allow a card transaction, if it would make your account go overdrawn or over any agreed overdraft limit. We may charge you for this. If we do pay the cheque, other item or card transactions and your account goes overdrawn or over any agreed overdraft limit, this does not mean that we have agreed an overdraft or an increased limit. You must immediately pay enough money into your account to cover the overdrawn amount or the amount that is over your agreed overdraft limit…

7.17 As well as charging interest under 7.6 and the applicable fee as set out under clause 7.11 above, we may charge you if we pay a cheque which has been guaranteed by your Maestro debit card or a Maestro transaction you have made and, as a result, your Bank Account goes overdrawn or goes over any agreed overdraft limit.”

 

 

From 1 December 2006

“7.3 You can request an overdraft, or an increase to an existing overdraft, on your Bank Account … from us. You can do this in one of two ways, either:

- by way of a formal request, that is, you ask us for and we agree to provide you with, an overdraft or an increase to an existing overdraft limit before you authorise any payments or withdrawals from your account that, if made y us, would cause your account to go overdrawn or over an existing overdraft limit; or

- by way of an informal request, that is, where you authorise a payment or withdrawal to be made from your account which, if made by us, would cause your account to go overdrawn or over an existing overdraft limit without having agreed with us in advance an overdraft or an increase in an existing overdraft limit on your account to cover such payment.

7.5 If we receive an informal request for an overdraft or an increase to an existing overdraft limit from you, we will consider your request and if we agree to it, w will provide you with an overdraft or an increase to your existing overdraft to cover the item concerned for 31 days. An Arrangement Fee may be charged if we agree to your informal request.

You will not be charged further Arrangement Fee(s) provided your account does not go further overdrawn. However, if you account goes into credit, or the overdrawn balance on your account decreases, and you them make another informal request for an overdraft and we agree to such request, we may charge you a further Arrangement Fee.

If we do not agree to an informal request from you for an overdraft or an increase to an existing overdraft limit, then we will not make any payment authorised by you that would cause your account to go overdraft or over any agreed overdraft limit. We may charge for considering and returning these informal payment requests..

7.6 We may charge you interest whenever your account .. goes overdrawn, on the amount by which it is overdrawn…”

 

 

From 4 June 2007 The Price list and Interest Rates document

“Arrangement Fees

1st overdraft in 6 months* free

Subsequent overdrafts £25

*No Arrangement Fee is payable if, in the last 6 months, we have not agreed to an overdraft request from you. See our Fair Fees Policy below for full details.

Return Fees

We may not be able to grant every request you make for an overdraft. When we decline an informal overdraft request we will not charge an Arrangement Fee but a Return Fee will be payable for considering and returning payment requests e.g. cheque, standing order, direct debit etc.

Up to £10 no charge

Up to £25 £10 per item

Above £25 per item.

 

HSBC Fair Fees Policy

We always aim to be fair in the way we charge for our Overdraft services, therefore..

- if debited arrangement fees (or interest) cause your account to go overdrawn or further overdrawn we will not make a further charge

- arrangement Fees charged will never be higher than the overdraft requested (e.g. a £15 overdraft fee will not costs you say £50)

- we will not charge more than one Arrangement Fee a day.”

 

 

SCHEDULE 2

Schedule of Charges debited and interest

 

 

 

[set out account number and name, and table with

- date of charge,

- charge amount

- description of charge from statement

- calculation of interest?].

Use the spreadsheets. Ensure you include all the stated info and head it schedule 2.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Does that look right, I need to find out when the account was opened and enter the dates. Also what is the daily rate of Interest that should be charged until judgement?

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just received a call from D&G Solicitors. They have informed me that due to the fact NCO are taking legal action on a disputed account and have not followed the guidelines for account in dispute HSBC will be purchasing the account back form FV-1/NCO. I have obviously requested cofirmation of this in writing and will continue to defend the NCO action until formally told it has been called off. They also informed me that in light of what has happened to my account they are reviewing all accounts that are in dispute over charges and have been sold to decide whether to buy them back. An interesting turn, obviously as suggested by Pete they didn't want this action going any further.

 

Next steps, how do I get the defaults NCO have placed on my file removed and can I seek compensation from them? I have allready reported them to the relevant authorities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once you get this confirmation in writing from HSBC you can send a copy of it to NCO - pointing out that they no longer have your account and requesting that they remove the default .........

 

But you are right to keep defending the NCO action until it is formally called off . HSBC are between a rock and a hard place -the ball seems to be in your court pblackie....... run with it!:D

Don't know about compensation though - they must have thought it was legal at the time they did it...........but if you have reported it - the 'relevant authorities' may guide you on this.......

 

Could be pete will have further advice for you ....... but this is my humble opinion -:)

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi pblackie - have you had the confirmation in writing from HSBC that they have taken this account back?

 

If so ,have a look at pete's #13 and my #16 on this thread and see if you can take it from there.

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I received a call from them yesterday confirming that they had bought the account back and were sending a letter out to me confirming this. I also received a call from NCO saying the same and that they would be replying under seperate cover to the FOS with regards to the complaint I have with them. Will leave it until Tuesday to receive these and then if still haven't received them submit my defence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds to me like the best way to go .......:)

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hiya pblackie, I don't understand why NCO want you to sign this document and to be honest I don't think you should with its present wording.

 

You have not "agreed to resolve" anything with NCO. HSBC have bought the debt back so NCO should withdraw their claim as they are no longer a party to this matter.

 

As for returning the account to its previous balance and returning the files to HSBC I don't see they have any choice but to do this. This (at best) was an HSBC error selling your account to a debt collector, how they handle their files and termination of the action is up to them and has nothing to do with you.

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hey great result - !!!!!!!!!!

 

CONGRATULATIONS AND WELL DONE !!

 

So much for IND/NCO - that means HSBC have got it back ...... are they going to try to do anything with it , do you know? Have they said anymore?

 

Sorry I should have read further back on this :oops:.......it'll now be you who takes action to recover your charges -

 

Should be fairly straightforward now pblackie - waiting like the rest of us when you get 'stayed' LOL!:grin:

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...