Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Me V HSBC


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4725 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

There is nothing they can legally do to recover any debt unless they take you to court and as you have claims there already this is exactly what you want too :).

 

Your accounts are in dispute so they should not be processing data about you and informing the credit reference agencies of these matters, if they are they are in breach of the banking code.

 

If you are getting telephone harassment have a read of this thread

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/37006-harassment-telephone-response-letter.html

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

So your claim is stayed and HSBC are allowed to carry on adding charges and interest to your redundant bank account HOWEVER to actually recover what they no doubt see as a debt they will have to take you to court and as soon as they do that they run into you stayed claim :).

 

I am in exactly the same situation and in fact they have given up writing to me now :) heres my thread all the info is there but I warn you now there is a lot of rubbish there too :rolleyes: from memory you need to look from about post #350 onwards.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/85633-castlebest-ii-return-claims.html

 

If you have any queries just ask :grin:

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...

Withdrawal of banking facilities.

Oh dear they are gong to stop you using an account you don't use anymore :rolleyes:

 

Enforcement of any security and credit reference

Your claim is at court stage, until they resolve your complaint they are not allowed to do anything to your credit file (but they will) :cool:

 

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

They cant do anything to you if your claim is with the County Court, the only way they can recover what they see as a debt is through the very same county court and your claim is blocking that.

They can and will report you as defaulting to the credit reference agencies, have a look at my thread, my letter to them is in post 5 :)

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/data-protection-default-issues/164871-castlebests-default-removal.html

 

I believe Bank Fodder has also written a new template along similar lines although I've not found it yet, I've been told parts of it resemble my letter too :rolleyes: (yes he did ask me :D)

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 year later...

Hiya Hasselhoof :)

 

We are working on the new particulars for the way forward as fast as we can and as soon as we have something concrete it will be posted in the templates library. Advice at the moment is buy as much time as you can.

 

When this is available you will need to amend your claim anyway so I dont see any reason why you shouldnt amend your schedule of charges to include the additional ones at the same time, thats what I intend to do.

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Hiya Hasselhoof :) what do you mean the rest is waffle.. its all waffle!!!

 

Just received a letter from HSBC informing me (in short, though it was a 3 page letter) that they consider the matter closed.

 

They would love it to be closed but they are wrong :rolleyes:

 

In response you have stated that although the charges could not be assessed under regulation 6(2)b of the UTCCRs they are not precluded from assessment under regulation 5(1) of the UTCCRs.

 

The Office of Fair Trading, which brought the bank charges test case against various banks have challenged informal overdraft charges on two grounds, namely that@ (a) they constitute penalties at common law; and (b) they are unfair under regulation 5(1) of the UTCCRs on the basis that they are too high. As has now been definitively determined, neither of these two challenges is open to the OFT or consumers.

 

Totaly wrong, the legal arguments that should have been addressed by the test case eventually disseminated to the issue of the correct interpretation (in its European context) and application of Regulation 6(2) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 SI 1999/2083 (“the 1999 Regulations”)Regulation 5(1) was never addressed.

 

Write back and tell them they are wrong, you can even quote Lord Phillips who stated in the test case appeal judgment (somwhere around paragraph 80 - 90 I think) that he considered clause 5(1) could be used.

 

pete

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hiya Rich :) they used Moorcroft against me and I sent them this :D

 

Moorcroft Debt Recovery Limited

PO Box No 17

2 Spring Gardens

Stockport

SK1 4AJ

Dear Mr Martin

My account with HSBC Bank Plc

Account number xxxxxx-xxxxxxxx Outstanding Balance £ xxx.xx

Moorcroft Reference xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

NOTICE OF LITIGATION ALREADY IN PROGRESS

COUNTY COURT CLAIM NUMBER XXXXXXXX

 

I acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 28th September 2009 and again confirm to you the debt you have been instructed to recover is already the subject of my own County Court Claim No XXXXXXXXX against your client.

Your own proposed litigation against me is totally pointless and any costs you incur proceeding with this action will be your own responsibility as you are not a party to the litigation that is already in progress.

I suggest you refer back to your client or their legal representatives DG Solicitors who are fully aware of the current situation before you waste any of your own money in futile litigation.

Luv and Kisses

Castlebest

Cc

DG Solicitors

12 Calthorpe Road

Edgbaston

Birmingham

B15 1QZ

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...