Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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 letter. FSA suspend timetable ?


mrfog
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5787 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

Hi everyone.

 

So like so many I have decided to reclaim my unfair charges and this morning I have received a letter from HSBC detailing what charges were applied over the past 6 years. However I am a little unsure how to proceed from here due to what the letter says. Here's a quote:

 

However, the bank (along with a number of other banks) has now become involved in legal proceedings with the Office Of Fair Trading ("OFT") in relation to bank charges which we believe will resolve the legal issues ragarding the fairness and legality of your bank charges.

 

It would be our normal approach to resolve any complaint you may have through our internal complaints process as quickly as possible. However, until the determination of the legal issues in the above proceedings, we have asked the FSA to suspend the normal timetable for dealing with bank charges complaints , and the FSA has agreed to this request subject to conditions that protect your rights.

 

Would anyone please be kind enough to explain to me where I should go from here and what this means please? Is the bank just stalling?

 

Many thanks

Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya mrfrog and welcome to the HSBC forum :).

 

You have received the standard HSBC stalling letter and we believe you should carry on with your claim regardless. Have a read of this thread which should explain things a bit more clearly to you.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/announcement.php?f=166&a=117

 

Good luck

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much for your reply. The FAQ has cleared a few things up for me. I fully intend to continue to persue this. Should I send them a letter simply requesting my charges be refunded or should I go straight for court action now? I apologise if I have missed the answer to this somewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The suggested procedure is a request letter giving them 14 days to respond, then a letter before action again giving them 14 days to respond and then file your claim with the county court.

 

Once they have responded to a letter (if they respond at all) go to the next stage altering the "disappointed with the lack of response" to "disappointed with the response" in the first paragraph of the template letter.

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

The suggested procedure is a request letter giving them 14 days to respond, then a letter before action again giving them 14 days to respond and then file your claim with the county court.

 

Once they have responded to a letter (if they respond at all) go to the next stage altering the "disappointed with the lack of response" to "disappointed with the response" in the first paragraph of the template letter.

 

pete

 

Pete you're an absolute star for helping and if I pull this off I will gladly make a donation to the upkeep of the site. Stay tuned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, if you incur any new charges between now and when you file at court, you can just add these to your schedule of charges that you send with your letters.

[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

Also, if you incur any new charges between now and when you file at court, you can just add these to your schedule of charges that you send with your letters.
great stuff lads your helping another poor soul that's got caught by HSBC,Keep the good work up have a lovely bank holiday.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lads? :eek: I'm a ladette lol

 

I hope you have a lovely bank holiday as well ANDENA.

[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

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi everyone. Just thought I would say after asking for my money back I have now had another stalling letter back from HSBC saying the usual FSA stuff from the first one. I have now written back with my LBA. I wonder what they will say now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They can and will use the same argument when you have filed your claim with the county court and you will have a stay placed on your claim pending the outcome of the test case.

 

We are still recommending you file your claim with the county courts though for a few reasons, not least of which is once you have filed your claim it attracts the County Courts Act section 69 interest at 8%.

 

Heres a thread that explains everything

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/oft-test-case-updates/139971-oft-abbey-others-april.html

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...