Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I can only speak from personal experience. But a similar thing happened to me. Seriously dented door.  I made the other insurance pay. They regarded it as a write off. Took the money, replaced the door. Never heard anything more about it.    Except clearly someone sold my details to claims company, because I got loads of calls in bad English for a few month's 
    • The incident was 03rd March 2024 - and that was the only letter that I have received from MET 15th April 2024 The charge I paid was at the Stansted Airport exit gate (No real relevance now - I thought this charge was for that!!).   Here is the content of email to them (Yes I know I said I was the driver !!!!) as said above -  I thought this charge was for that!! "Stansted Airport" Dear “To whom it may concern” My name is ??  PCN:  ?? Veh Reg: Date of Incident: 03rd March 2024 I have just received a parking charge final reminder letter, dated 10th April 2024 - for an overstay.  This is the first to my knowledge of any overstay. I am aware that I am out of the 28 days, I don’t mean to be rude, this feels like it is a scam My movements on this day in question are, I pulled into what looked like a service station on my way to pick my daughter and family up from Stansted airport. The reason for me pulling into this area was to use a toilet, so I found Starbucks, and when into there, after the above, I then purchased a coffee. After which I then continued with my journey to pick my daughter up. (however after I sent this email I remember that Starbucks was closed so I then I walked over to Macdonalds) There was no signs about parking or any tickets machines to explains about the parking rules. Once at Stansted, I entered and then paid on exit.  So Im not show where I overstayed my welcome.. With gratitude    
    • Just to enlarge on Dave's great rundown of your case under Penalty. In the oft quoted case often seen on PCNs,  viz PE v Beavis while to Judges said there was a case for claiming that £100 was a penalty, this was overruled in this case because PE had a legitimate interest in keeping the car park free for other motorists which outweighed the penalty. Here there is no legitimate interest since the premises were closed. Therefore the charge is a penalty and the case should be thrown out for that reason alone.   The Appeals dept need informing about what and what isn't a valid PCN. Dummies. You should also mention that you were unable to pay by Iphone as there was no internet connection and there was a long  queue to pay on a very busy day . There was no facility for us to pay from the time of our arrival only the time from when we paid at the machine so we felt that was a bit of a scam since we were not parked until we paid. On top of that we had two children to load and unload in the car which should be taken into account since Consideration periods and Grace periods are minimum time. If you weren't the driver and PoFA isn't compliant you are off scot free since only the driver is liable and they are saying it was you. 
    • Thank you dx. I consider myself well and truly told :) x Thank you dx. I consider myself well and truly told :) x
  • 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

HFO Services/Capital/Turnbull barclaycard debt


vjohn82
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4751 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,

 

Just to keep the thread nice and clean... please place ANY Notice of Assignment you have received from HFO Services / HFO Capital / Turnbull Rutherford in this thread.

 

Make sure your personal details are blanked out for privacy reasons and to meet the forum rules.

 

Please also state when/if you were taken to court by any of the above companies, the date this occurred, who the Claimant was and the outcome.

 

The document will not be used without your permission.

 

Thank you very much.

 

To get the ball rolling here is the one I received.

 

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

VJ1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Part of an email excerpt received literally 3 minutes ago from Barclaycard Debt Sale Management Team:

 

"I can also confirm it is normal practice for debt agencies to send the Notice of Assignments to customers once accounts have been sold to them and we give them permission to use our logo and letterheads for this purpose."

 

Bad news HFO Capital/HFO Services/Turnbull Rutherford...

 

YOU HAVE BEEN RUMBLED

EVERY account which has an incorrect assignee on a Barclaycard letterhead is an UTTER FRAUD.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm usually careful to avoid libels... crikey, i've been trained in avoiding it. Pretty much everything we post about this lot is based on their documents and their statements. Puzzled... could a mod elucidate by PM?

 

I'm guessing maybe a mod has re-read the whole thread and spotted a naughty... or maybe, maybe there have been complaints....

 

Apologies in advance!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have requested a mod to take a look in... seems odd to remove posts with no reasonable explanation.
I have been through the whole thread. The only post that has been moderated is the old post #12 which accuses Turnbull of fraud and has therefore been moderated

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been through the whole thread. The only post that has been moderated is the old post #12 which accuses Turnbull of fraud and has therefore been moderated

 

Hi Steven,

 

Thanks for the clarification but what exactly was mentioned with regard to the "fraud" - was it a generic sweeping statement or was it specifically related to a document/account?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

i cant seem to see any posts unapproved here?

 

was it on this thread ?

 

Here was the message I received...

 

Hi vjohn82,

 

The post that you created in the following thread has been un-approved

 

-----

Post ID:

VJ

 

You also need to consider the Van...

Thread: ***Notices of Assignment from HFO Services***

-----

 

This is an automated message, please do not reply.

 

Regards,

The Forum Management

Link to post
Share on other sites

VJ

 

You cannot accuse a solicitor of fraud. On the other hand, I beileve that you can say that the documents sent to various debtors from certain companies may be prime facie evidence of an offence under S2 of the Fraud Act 2006 and their introduction into court with a 'Statement of Truth' constitute a further offence under Section 5 of the Perjury Act 1911.

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

VJ

 

You cannot accuse a solicitor of fraud. On the other hand, I beileve that you can say that the documents sent to various debtors from certain companies may be prime facie evidence of an offence under S2 of the Fraud Act 2006 and their introduction into court with a 'Statement of Truth' constitute a further offence under Section 5 of the Perjury Act 1911.

 

Docman,

 

I disagree. There is too much sensitivity regarding what might be construed libel/slander in the modern age. Anyone can make a claim which they have an honest belief in its truth.

 

The dictionary states clearly what "fraud", the noun, is:

 

–noun

1. deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.

2. a particular instance of such deceit or trickery: mail fraud; election frauds.

3. any deception, trickery, or humbug: That diet book is a fraud and a waste of time.

4. a person who makes deceitful pretenses; sham; poseur.

 

If the solicitor wished to bring proceedings against me or the site he would have to argue against Barclaycards own statement that:

 

a) they sold the account to Roxburghe

b) they did not write the NoA recently used in proceedings

 

TR/HFO used a document using Barclaycard headed paper which claimed the accound was sold to HFO Capital.

 

I would like to see him argue against it.

 

In any case I would like to know on what basis the mods removed the post... I do not recall accusing anyone/any firm of anything.

 

I am very careful with the words I use as I know better than anyone here how your own threads can be used against you in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brief Timeline:

 

1. CCJ entered in default in July 2007 - unable to defend due to illness

 

2. Recovered sufficiently in 2009 to start a legal challenge

 

3. The Set aside process started in September and concluded in my favour on 9th November 2009

 

4. Defence filed on 16th November and the Claimant filed both a response and a Summary Judgement application

 

5. Allocation Questionnaires exchanged in December 2009

 

6. Notice to Admit Facts - CPR 32.19 sent to Claimant upon the discovery of a document which I allege has been created specifically for the purposes of litigation

 

7. HFO Services attempt to serve a "gagging order" by complaining to the District Judge that a document (exhibit CP2) was disclosed in contravention to the CPR

 

8. Document proved to be disclosed during a public hearing on the 9th November 2009 and document allowed

 

9. In December I received written evidence from the original creditor Barclaycard that they do not create Notices of Assignment and that they allow the new "assignees" to do this by using letter heads/official documents etc

 

10. Barclaycard also confirm the account was sold on 04/05/2006 to Roxburghe UK Limited

 

11. This proves HFO Services/Capital have no legitimate right to pursue legal proceedings

 

12. I send a Notice to Admit Facts again to HFO Services in January

 

13. HFO Services instruct Turnbull Rutherford to "discontinue" the claim in full for unspecified reasons

 

Current status:

 

14. I am currently pursuing a wasted costs order under CPR 38.6 for £700+

 

15. Turnbull Rutherford Solicitors instructed remove my information from their files

HFO Services have until 8th February 2010 to remove my information from credit files and pay my wasted costs

 

16. Currently considering taking the claim to a hearing by "setting aside" their discontinuance

 

Previous thread has been deleted for, as of yet, unconfirmed reasons but if you are to post here please keep your messages factual. Opinions which allege fraudulent or criminal activity will cause me to alert the site team. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the terms and conditions they alleged in their Witness Statement that were the ones that governed the account in question:

 

Agreement001.jpg

 

 

Here's the signature box of the application form

 

SignatureBoxBlanked.jpg

 

 

Notice how clause 15 on the terms and conditions bears absolutely no relevance to the one stipulated in the signature box?

 

Basically HFO Services submitted a terms and conditions document which bears no relation to the actual account they were attempting to enforce.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember the Notice of Assignment above? HFO Services/Turnbull Rutherford claim that it was sent by Barclaycard.

 

See paragraph 5:

 

 

TRWitnessStatementpage2001.jpg

 

 

However, Barclaycard say different and make it clear that it's normal practice for new assignees to produce their own assignments with permission to use logos etc:

 

 

EmailaboutNoAs.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Draw your own conclusions as to who created that "Barclaycard" document... it certainly wasn't Barclaycard or else the assignment would have the correct date and the correct assignee.

 

They discontinued on the 18th Jan with no reason offered; care to wonder why?

 

Lesson to be learned?

 

Always ask the question of the original creditor, they might just hold different information.

 

I might add that HFO took this case to court without a credit agreement, proper default notice and with a balance made up of default fees.

 

There is now the issue of my wasted costs under CPR 38.6 to consider... we'll have to see if they pay them by the 8th Feb or face these issues in court after all.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...