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

HFO SERVICES hassle


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4843 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

Just been reading the thread hfo threatening 15 year old daughter think it's great what has done and hopefully these people will get what they deserve.

 

Got another question with query they say it's a credit card but i'm sure this could be a loan would this matter in anyway?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 198
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi again i've finally got a email back from the kind people of HFO it goes like this,

 

Dear xxxxxxxxxx,

Further to your email, please find below details of the information you requested:

Account Originally with: MARKS & SPENCERS FINANCIAL

Old Reference Number: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Start Date: 24-12-99

Default Date: 15-12-00

HFO account reference number: xxxxxxxxxxxx

I can also confirm that the original payment plan was set up on this account on 27/11/06, for the first payment to be received by direct debit on 15 December 06. As requested please find enclosed a statement of account giving details of payments that have been received on this account and the current outstanding balance.

Please be advised due to security reasons we do not hold any bank account/sort code details on the system after a payment plan had been defaulted upon. As a result, we will not be able to provide you with the bank account details that were used to set up the payment plan originally.

Should you have any further queries in regards to this account, please do not hesitate to contact xxxxxxxxxx on xxxxxxxxxxx.

Kind regards,

Please note the date of the default and the date of the apparent first direct debit. This is exactly 6 years, how weird is that?

For some reson they sent me the attached statement of the dates of the apparent direct debits in adobe acrobat and I dont know how to copy and paste but it shows dates of me apparently paying throughout 2007 which I know is not true and the start date was 13/12/06. Now i'm sure direct debits are on or after the date they are set up and not before so how did they get a payment before the apparent agreed date of 15/12/06 which incidently is exactly 6 years after the default date.

Please help I need to know if a statute barred is 6 years from the default date?

Also what should I do next? I'm currently waiting for my bank statements from the previous 7 years to prove to them this was never set up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did this come from HFO or Turnbull Rutherford?

 

Looks like some blatant economy with the actualité here - bordering on the f-word, if your statements show that no direct debit was set up. If this is the case, then yours is an issue that I will personally make sure gets taken up with the Old Bill!

 

Ask HFO for a copy of your Direct Debit mandate - they're obliged to keep this fo six or seven years I think. When will you get your bank statements?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried to get my bank statements about 3 weeks ago and they sent me a copy of all the charges I had in the previous 7 years ! So i've had to ring them again and ask for the actual statements because it's a case of proving something else, so within the next 7 days I will hopefully get them.

 

Why are they saying for security reasons they cant keep bank account details?

 

Yes Donkey this was from HFO directly, client support assistant.

 

I've just sent a reply email and guess what they were returned undeliverable! So now shall I send it to the enquiries email? Copy below

HFO Services Limited

PO Box 342

Lavender Park Rd

West Byfleet, KT14 6YX

 

HFO account reference number: xxxxxxxxxxx

Account Originally with: MARKS & SPENCERS FINANCIAL

Re: Recent reply to email

Dear Sir/Madam

Further to your recent reply to my email I am currently in contact with my bank to see if these apparent direct debits are in fact true. These statements will be available to me in the next 7 days.

As stated in my original email and a later amended email I need a copy of the payment agreement that HFO services say I agreed to and a copy of the consumer credit agreement of the alleged debt. I still have not received these.

Until these enquires are met then I cannot help you with this matter so I would suggest that HFO Services send copies of these documents to the address provided,

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Regards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are they saying for security reasons they cant keep bank account details?

 

When a retailer, for example, takes your card details for a one-off payment, they are not allowed to keep your details on file and must destroy them. For a direct debit, however, or a standing order, I'm sure it is a different case (otherwise how could they continue to take the money?).

 

I know of lots of cases where direct debits have been missed then reinstated some time later - in my own case, I changed insurers, but a another insurer recommenced the old direct debit without my permission some time later - so someone must keep the details. They would also have been obliged to send you a letter confirming the DD details.

 

Let me do some digging.

 

Your HFO case is one of the most blatantly dishonest ways of trying to get round a statute-barred debt that I have ever encountered. It beggars belief.

Edited by DonkeyB
Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a dormancy period after which the BACS system discards electronic records, but it seems odd they'd dispose of the paper trail - especially as they are obliged to write to you to confirm arrangements, and should have a copy of that correspondence.

 

Also, why would they not try to reinstate the DD?

 

Hang fire on your letter - let's get more input. Can you chase your bank for a statement at the date of the supposed first DD? Mine send them to me by fax if I ask nicely!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm amazed. I know that HFO have pulled some stunts with 'funny' documents but to try and claim this without any supporting documents is rubbish.

 

i suggest you continue with this but start to put everything on snail mail- and by recorded delvery as well.

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

They're also adding these 'broken plan' charges. Unless it's in the original T&Cs, AND they have the agreement, they can't add anything.

 

There's no opening balance, nothing. They are having a laugh.

 

Interestingly, 18/8/07 was a Saturday. Also, not sure how DDs work, but I'm sure they bounce on impact - no money, no transfer. I doubt it takes a week to be bounced back to the bank.

 

You must get your bank statements checked urgently to establish that no payments have been made. Is there any way you can think of they might have gotten your bank details?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I note they refer to Marks & Spencer as their 'client'. I thought they'd bought the debt?

 

There's another possibility here. We're assuming HFO may have conveniently found a payment just inside the six-year limit. If, for some reason, you did pay these amounts - imagine, please! - then I think you should start looking seriously at the veracity of the alleged default date instead. It's just too convenient.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that also! It seems to near to already being stat barred and just inside the 6 year period for them, so if these payments were made they would infact owe it me. I'm 90% sure they were not because at this time I was in the middle of moving house.

 

How would I go about finding out the exact default date?

Link to post
Share on other sites

... also the alleged start date of the account is Xmas Eve 1999, which was a Sunday.

 

You could check your credit report, but I doubt there would be a default going as far back as 2000. You could SAR M&S, to ask for statements, but again they probably don't have them as it's eight years since termination.

 

The simple fact is HFO have to PROVE the default dates.

 

I also note they took payment of the first alleged DD two days earlier than they said they would. That's because a DD on 15 Dec 06 would have been a day too late. Those statements, we need those statements...

Link to post
Share on other sites

agree 100% with donkey.

a bank would not allow a DD to be sent 2 days before payment date.

a failed DD is returned automatic,they are having a laugh claiming a week.

transactions are done overnight,is that not why the bank say that funds should be available 24 hrs before.

 

absolute corker xmas eve sunday:lol:

SAM:pLOWELL DETESTER

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever happens, there's a good chance they don't have the T&Cs from 1999. A CCA request will wheedle that out of them (or not), but as previous posters have said, let's first see their proof it's not statute-barred. After that, we go CCA or CPR31 route.

 

I also note they've very kindly decided you don't owe over £17k after all...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that if an account is statute barred it cannot be reset unless it is a mortgage shortfall.... HFO are flying very close to the wind here.

 

I also think that statement is made up, I can do one for you charging them £10 per time for a phone call and £9.25 per hour for legal research... plus 'postage charges'.... but of course they wouldn't fall for that would they?

 

I would get onto Merton Trading Standards about them as they have a special department dealing with HFO... do it today and you might put another nail in their coffin.

 

The 165 Broadway address is an office block in Wimbledon which has loads of companies renting office space by the month, it's known to have dodgy companies there and no respectable company will rent space there... I know as I go past it quite regularly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest you may wish to hang on from contacting Trading Standards until your bank gets back to you. If your bank confirms there was no such direct debit, you might like to complain to the Fraud Unit at your local police and remind them of S2 of the Fraud Act 2006 which states:

 

Section 2, Fraud Act 2006

Fraud by false representation

(1) A person is in breach of this section if he

(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and

(b) intends, by making the representation

(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2) A representation is false if

(a) it is untrue or misleading, and

(b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.

(3) Representation means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of

(a) the person making the representation, or

(b) any other person.

(4) A representation may be express or implied.

(5) For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

 

You would , of course, wish to copy in the local Trading Standards, the Office of Fair Trading and the Solicitors Regulation Authority, just to keep everyone fully informed.

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wondering if, in the meantime, it's worth another 'prove it' letter to HFO specifically asking for proof of the date of opening the account and proof of the date of default. They've already put the noose around their neck with the first response re the payments.

 

Would hate to lose any momentum on this. Anger is a great motivator!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...