HFO Services/Capital/Turnbull barclaycard debt

[patrickq1]

we await your opinion PT o great one lol

[DonkeyB]

Patrick, my legal knowledge is one step up from zilch, so I'm not sure what exactly is going on here. I find the letter bewildering, but my very basic knowledge of power of attorney tells me I'm either out of my depth (yup!) or the letter is cowturds (probably).

 

However, there's something distinctly unsavoury about that reply. A bit like the whole Barclaycard-HFO axis issue, really. Look forward to a true expert's thoughts.

[DonkeyB]

VJ, the content and tone of that letter tell me you will get nothing resolved by the hearing date in May. Now wouldn't that be convenient for someone?

[patrickq1]

Power of attorney. A power of attorney is a written document that gives someone the legal authority to act for you as your agent or on your behalf. To be legal, it must be signed and notarized.

[patrickq1]

signed and NOTARIZED ....this almost certainly has not happened if that had happened it would have been the first document to have been entered into court from the begining,so in other words Barclays wish to use deception in order to cover up there mistakes i thinks

[DonkeyB]

HFO have only claimed to have authority (not PoA) from Barclaycard to issue Notices of Assignment on their behalf. I doubt this would apply to writing any old letters to help in court cases, especially where the facts haven't been checked. I doubt Barclays would allow such power in the hands of a third party - the consequences could be disastrous.

 

It seems the issue of PoA has been introduced to unnecessarily complicate matters. Looking at VJ's letter, he was clear what he meant - asking for clarification is disingenuous at best.

[Docman]

Guys

 

I nearly fell off my chair when I read Barclays letter. It is disgraceful and frankly not worth replying to directly. It looks like it was written by a pipsqueak upstart, possibly one doing a favour for a friend. Whether the friend is internal or external to Barclays is hard to tell.

 

If I had received this letter, I would not be responding to the 'trainee solicitor'. Instead I would write directly to Mark Harding, Barclays General Counsel who has responsibility for the group's legal and regulatory matters. I would start by asking him if is this the standard of response to expect from the Bank's legal team.

[middenmess]

An incompetent response written by a complete dcik!

 

Why would a 'trainee solicitor' respond to you---in fact is there any distinction between an 'office junior' and a 'trainee solicitor?'

 

He/she might just of well signed as 'trainee biased Judge' or 'trainee DCA'

 

That is assuming of course that the letter actually came from Barclaycard;)

[humbleman]

IMO You can give power of attorney, and sign documents on behalf of, but you can't sign document (by way of having a power of attorney) as the person giving you such power. I.E. Barclaycard gives P.O.A. to HFO, so HFO can write letters onbehalf of BC, but I don't think they can sign on behalf of particular person at BC except by way of pp.

Edited March 9, 2010 by humbleman

[middenmess]

Perhaps 'trainee solicitor' replied to this advert to get his/her job.....

 

Head of GRCB Legal HR,

[Gallahad]

Vj I really have to thank you I have not had such a belly laugh for years. By its very nature cag is serious and stressful for us all that have reason to be on here so such light relief is very welcome.

G

[broken arrow]

Well VJ, firstly due to the seriousness of your complaint, what on earth is a trainee solicitor doing replying to this matter, I think he needs to go back to making the coffee.

 

If he cannot understand the information you have given him, maybe he should be looking at a new career.

 

When you do respond, it needs the attention of whoever is the head of the legal team, maybe one of your famous phone conversations might be the answer.

 

Look forward to the next instalment.

[Rhia]

Having had a previous encounter with BC they use trainees/legal execs as the first line of fire. Incidentally that job ad said they deal with employment laws primarily. I suspect what we are all doing has them in a state as they don't have anyone with consumer laws experience. I shot no end of holes through their arguments without really trying and all they do is repeat their mantras. Go above them and start with the head honcho.

 

Anyway I digress. Look at the first line of the address GRCB. Check this one out as it stands for Gracechurch Recievables. It's their securitisation operation and I think funneled through Jersey. Isn't it odd that Barclays legal team comes under the heading of Gracechurch?

 

In other words they have securitised the debt. It's off their balance sheets and they simply act as collection agents which is why they put up such a fight over refunds as it comes out of their own pocket.

 

I am sorry to add a further dimension to this but i think it matters. They have securitised the debt via Jersey to the trust they operate. It's off their balance sheet and in the hands of God-knows-what offshore operation (which must have some tax implications).

 

Then they have sold it to various HFO incarnations, again all offshore with even more tax benefits/implications. We really need an expert on these things as I find it hard to work it all out but have no doubts whatsoever that these debts do not actually exist.

 

They are simply credit which isn't proper money with interest and charges on top plus other rubbish charges. It's a massive legalised Ponzi scheme which we all know it is.

 

What you need to do VJ is hit BC really hard on this one. Go to the top and hit them with Power of Attorney (which is quite difficult to get these days). Ask to see the POW document. For if it does exist I think it will lead to Gracechurch Receivables.

 

If they won't answer get them into court to answer.

 

And we all thought it was over bar the expenses.

[vjohn82]

I'm not quite stuck on what to do... but I think I need to stop dealing with this coffee maker extraordinnaire (well Cormac must be good at something else because his legal skills leave a lot to be desired).

 

I think I will take a chance on this legally... I have nothing to lose on it. Even if I lose I will be receiving lots of information from Barclaycard they would otherwise keep hidden away somewhere in the archives. It might help someone else out one day.

 

Quite simply... I don't give a flying f*** anymore... I've got nothing to lose with it. I'll be seeking small claims court redress which will keep the costs down should anything go disastrously wrong

 

Something needs to be done... rather go out on my shield so to speak.

[Rhia]

:d

[vjohn82]

Here's is what Mr Coffee Maker is having back...

 

 

Dear Mr Coffee Maker/Pen Pusher,

 

I received your letter this morning and can confirm I have been in receipt of the legal advice since November 2009 when I successfully defended court action by HFO Services.

 

Power of Attorney

 

Your letter highlighted the issue of “Power of Attorney” and suggested that I familiarise myself with the concept.

 

I fully understand the principles underlying the concept. I understand that in order for Barclaycard to confer the rights and duties of a contract there needs to be one in place which meets the jurisdiction of the country in which said contract takes place. The contract between Barclaycard and HFO Capital Limited, which I alerted you to, is not valid under English Law for the reasons I demonstrated in my previous correspondence. Clause 36A of the Companies Act states two signatories for each company who are party to the contract must be present in order to be a valid contract. If you dispute this then please state your reasons.

 

I have inferred from your letter that you believe that a Power of Attorney allowed Barclaycard to grant the right of litigation onto another company. I would only add that I am aware of recent case law in Gregory v Turner, R (on application of Morris) v North Somerset Council [2003] where it was held that “a power of attorney cannot confer a right to conduct litigation or of audience”. You might state that Barclaycard can confer a right of a contract onto another company but the deed of assignment by which this “agreement” took place between yourselves and HFO Capital is not valid under English law as I stated above.

 

Perhaps you can state what relevance Power of Attorney has with regard to this account or indeed the case that endured with HFO? I can find absolutely none. If you wish to meet the overriding objective I would appreciate this clarification before I take my next steps to ensure that we have a “cards on the table” approach to any prospective proceedings.

Perhaps, if you wish to take issue with the assignment of the account, you should look at s.136 and 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 which is the statute governing the sale of debts and the service of this. Tracing it all back to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the ability of a company to terminate and sell a debt once a properly formatted Default Notice is served will alert you to the fact Barclaycard have no leg to stand on, so to speak.

 

I might also add that HFO took action in their own name using Turnbull Rutherford Solicitors as their legal representative. At no time during those proceedings did they refer to working under the guise of Power of Attorney or make reference to working under any instructions from Barclaycard. Equally they have maintained that all of the litigation proceedings have been conducted under the guise of absolute assignment and not equitable. Similarly Barclaycard have claimed that the sale of the account was absolute so how is it you can refer to the Power of Attorney?

 

Quite simply I believe you are trying to further complicate the issues which should be quite simple. If you are trying to confuse the issues then this says to me that there is something more serious underlying the entire case and that I have very good reason to be pursuing this line of correspondence.

 

Default Notice

 

Notwithstanding the above, the contract that was in place was a regulated agreement under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Individuals are liable to be a disadvantage when dealing with large financial organisations and therefore there are certain standards that are expected. You have asked me to provide greater detail of the case that can be made. I’m not sure why because the case I stated was quite succinct in my previous correspondence. Put simply the Default Notice, provided to you previously as document VJ2, does not meet section 88 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which states:

 

88.—(1) The default notice must be in the prescribed form

The prescribed format of a Default Notice can be found under schedule 2 of the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983. I am sure I do not have to go through it point by point to clarify why the Default Notice is not in the prescribed format.

 

I would then direct you to section 87 of the Act which states:

 

87.—(1) Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a "

default notice ") is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by

reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of a regulated agreement,—

(a) to terminate the agreement, or

(b) to demand earlier payment of any sum, or

© to recover possession of any goods or land, or

(d) to treat any right conferred on the debtor or hirer by the agreement as

terminated, restricted or deferred, or

(e) to enforce any security.

 

The failure of a Default Notice to be accurate gives rise to compensation as per Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119. What more information do you require other than that? The Default Notice is not compliant with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and associate regulations.

The issues are simple and tested in a court of law. I have been subjected to strenuous court action by a firm who I believe were never entitled to take action and seemingly under the authority and guidance from certain members of staff at Barclaycard. Mrs Maureen Cooke clearly lied in a telephone conversation with me about this assignment issue. Considering that these statements were apparently designed to obstruct the course of justice in the litigation proceedings with HFO I think you should be involving someone more senior at Barclaycard to consider this point.

 

Why is no-one in Barclaycard able to actually provide genuine answers? Barclaycard have absolutely no moral ground to stand on with this and I will ensure it goes to the very highest authorities unless someone takes responsibility and I am offered the apologies I believe I am due.

 

I expect this issue to be resolved quickly by Barclaycard. Goodness knows you have the resources within the organisation to get your act together and sort it out.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

vjohn82

 

[broken arrow]

His next career goal is to make tea!

[DonkeyB]

After this, he'll be trainee soliciting on street corners...

[middenmess]

I think you should be involving someone more senior at Barclaycard to consider this point

 

You could make him squirm a little more by saying.........

 

It would serve the interests of all concerned if this matter was referred to a senior and more qualified member of the Barclay's legal team who would hopefully have a more comprehensive knowledge of the relevant Acts of Parliament and would therefore be in a position to deal effectively with these matters.

 

Are you copying your letter to Barclay's head honcho as well?

[DonkeyB]

:D:D

 

Evil work, middenmess!

[broken arrow]

You could make him squirm a little more by saying.........

 

It would serve the interests of all concerned if this matter was referred to a senior and more qualified member of the Barclay's legal team who would hopefully have a more comprehensive knowledge of the relevant Acts of Parliament and would therefore be in a position to deal effectively with these matters.

 

Are you copying your letter to Barclay's head honcho as well?

 

Someone who can make tea and coffee.

[patrickq1]

I'm not quite stuck on what to do... but I think I need to stop dealing with this coffee maker extraordinnaire (well Cormac must be good at something else because his legal skills leave a lot to be desired).

 

I think I will take a chance on this legally... I have nothing to lose on it. Even if I lose I will be receiving lots of information from Barclaycard they would otherwise keep hidden away somewhere in the archives. It might help someone else out one day.

 

Quite simply... I don't give a flying f*** anymore... I've got nothing to lose with it. I'll be seeking small claims court redress which will keep the costs down should anything go disastrously wrong

 

Something needs to be done... rather go out on my shield so to speak.

 

now you have got me thinking

since my dealings are with HFO CAPITAL VIA BARCLAYS VIA GOLDFISH BACK TO MSDW and not to mention six other DCA'S who have all been involved ,am i right in thinking that MSDW ASSIGNED TO GOLDFISH TO BARCLAYS and all the other DCA'S perhaps the true assignments were wrong to start with since MSDW entered a zero balance as they did with DAVEFIREWALKER then i take it i actually have had my debt QUASHED BY MSDW ,since i have never been party to either a default by MSDW nor have i ever seen an ASSIGNMENT .i am thinking this is all one big C**K UP and this is why MSDW refuse to converse with me mmmmmmm i like that letter will nick some bits for me self VJ lol BRILLIANT LETTER haha taught you all i know hehe i wish

[broken arrow]

now you have got me thinking

since my dealings are with HFO CAPITAL VIA BARCLAYS VIA GOLDFISH BACK TO MSDW and not to mention six other DCA'S who have all been involved ,am i right in thinking that MSDW ASSIGNED TO GOLDFISH TO BARCLAYS and all the other DCA'S perhaps the true assignments were wrong to start with since MSDW entered a zero balance as they did with DAVEFIREWALKER then i take it i actually have had my debt QUASHED BY MSDW ,since i have never been party to either a default by MSDW nor have i ever seen an ASSIGNMENT .i am thinking this is all one big C**K UP and this is why MSDW refuse to converse with me mmmmmmm i like that letter will nick some bits for me self VJ lol BRILLIANT LETTER haha taught you all i know hehe i wish

 

Patrick PM me your e mail address

[patrickq1]

oops sent it to donki hehe on its way BA

[broken arrow]

oops sent it to donki hehe on its way BA

Cheers Patrick, will contact tomorrow.