Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Absolutely for the agreement they are referring to.... puts them on notice that this is going to be a uphill fight.   Andy 
    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre action protocol) failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
  • 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

SB100 v HFC - is this default compliant? Court/Restons ***WON***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5115 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

As Restons have failed to comply with the order, this will only irritate the Judge.............it's his orders Restons have chosen to disobey.

 

I'm sure you'll remind the Judge of this if Restons elect to continue to trial ;)

 

As I've said earlier, sit tight and wait to see what Restons throw at you next, but I'm sure you've read of their tricks already.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 611
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Surely they have to complete an AQ for it to proceed though as there's a fee payable?

 

 

Absolutely;)

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Make application to strike out the DJ may issue an unless order,without hearing so it will only cost you £35.00.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will this not wind the judge up? I've already had one SO application fail.

 

We're due to exchange witness evidence and statements this week- have no idea how to do that either, so I might need a bit of support this week..

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add for the sake of clarity.. I'm not sure I actually had to do my AQ, as my SO application would have interrupted the normal process- and this may be why they didn't follow normal protocol

Link to post
Share on other sites

Applications are normally (or should be) submitted with ones AQ.However in the instance of the Claimant failing to submit their AQ (on time and pay the Fee) It regarded as a strike out offense and an abuse of court procedure.

 

Andy

  • Haha 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't suppose you'd have any appropriate wording for the application ;)

 

As far as the other stuff I have to do this week is concernd, can I pretty much use the response to their SJ application that everyone helped me with earlier on the thread?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not seen your proposed response SB to SJ application if you could point me or repost.What is your time frame here dates?

What proposed track are we envisaging?

Where is the last Order posted in this matter?

 

Andy;)

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, here's my ws.. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/199150-sb100-hfc-default-compliant-11.html#post2484311

 

My application failed, but Restons tried to throw in an SJ application to co-incide, which the judge denied due to extremely short notice (about 5 days). The Judge warned them that there were 'issues' with their DN and offered them the opportunity to apply again for SJ, but it had to be by the end of last month. They appear to have declined his offer.

 

Here's a copy of the order (only received last week but now about six weeks old)

 

HFCorder005.jpg

 

I haven't received anything from the other side regarding disclosure etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you post their WS or point me.

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have their witness statement for their SJ application with me, sorry- can post it when I get home though.

 

It was basically the usual 'no prospect of winning', a copy of the alleged agreement, a copy of the t&c's that allegedly appeared on the other side, a witness statement from a solicitor at Restons stating that 'in his opinion the prescribed terms would have been on the reverse' and a witness statement from another HFC employee stating that the DN would have been sent first class- which I can immediately disprove as I have the UK Mail envelope.

 

Thanks Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok SB if you can.

 

I understand Car was assisting you with this.What date do you have to exchange WS by?

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess not thats why its essential you beef up that WS.When you say disclosure I assume you mean N265? have you not recieved this either?

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't heard anything from them since the hearing other than a letter asking that I consider settling the account. I didn't send anything for disclosure either as, stupidly, I thought it was by the end of November and I didn't get the order from the court til last week.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh well you can use that in your WS also.Would appear to be a bit of a shambles SB if you dont mind me saying that.They want SJ with no effort. no AQ. no fee. no disclosure.I would be tempted to strike out as a total nonsense and and a vexatious claim.

Post up their WS this evening and I will give you some guidance on how to trash it;)

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, here's their skeleton argument for their strike out application. I don't appear to have the copy of the statement from their employee that said it was sent first class, although this SA does refer to it.

 

p1.jpg

 

p2.jpg

 

p3.jpg

 

p4.jpg

 

p5.jpg

 

p6.jpg

 

p7.jpg

 

p8.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simply rebutting your defence isn't sufficient - they haven't stated on what grounds each reason of your defence should fail.

 

This amounts to a he-said, so we-said, situation, which the Court just can't accept.

 

They are hoping to win the "Judge Lottery" with that conclusion, effectively saying the Court should ignore all the rules of the Court, the legislation and the rules of evidence "because you've borrowed the money".

 

Personally, I would be putting a response to their SA forward, (which isn't required, but would be fun to construct) pointing all this out - then let the Court decide.

 

A word of warning, though, as usual. The Court may well decide this in their favour - highly improbable, but not impossible. You may want to consider if you want to push on, but I would if it were me... ;)

 

Is this a new claim? If so, and they haven't sought permission to bring it, (regardless of whether they think they can win or not) then you should seek a SO on that basis.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add, the SA was never actually used as the Judge didn't allow their application, but I would imagine it will form the basis of their case and statement which has to be submitted this week.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add, the SA was never actually used as the Judge didn't allow their application, but I would imagine it will form the basis of their case and statement which has to be submitted this week.

 

Hi SB

 

If their SA (posted by you above at post #320) is used as a basis for their case, then referring to Para 20 (which in turn refers to Para 6 of Bouffants WS), how can Bouffant make a 'Statement of Truth' as authorised by the claimant when he hasn't actually seen the original document (agreement) himself? Perhaps that's something that legal representatives are permitted to do, but I'd say he's on shaky ground.

 

The reason I say that is because of my personal experience with my own 'GM Card' alleged 'agreement', which I posted up at the very beginning of my thread; http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dca-legal-successes/124572-hfc-no-agreement-amended.html

 

Both myself and pt2537 noticed there were distinct crease marks on the application purported to be the agreement (2 marks which indicated an A4 page folded into three sections), but no such corresponding crease marks appeared on the T&Cs (shown at post #17).

 

The discussion of this appears in posts #1 and #13.

 

Cheers

Rob

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...