DG Solicitors are challenging my County Court defence

[Mihail]

Thanks Mould for the clarification of the Directions process.

Mindful of the Directions Hearing 16 March, do I now write to DG saying this is my understanding of the process and I require them to serve their amended pleadings before my amended and sufficiently particularised defence?

Listings said today it would be prudent for me to acknowledge the DG letter of 3 March.

 

I have just uploaded the 4 pages of the new agreement and a page of my medical evidence (hospital admission).

Is the new agreement the same as Chelsea's?

I signed the new agreement on 14.7.2005 and the diagnosis was in a letter to me from my GP 31.8.2005

I was admitted to hospital for the cancer operation on 3.10.2005

 

Hope this is useful.

 

Kind regards

Mihail

[The Mould]

Thanks Mould for the clarification of the Directions process.

Mindful of the Directions Hearing 16 March, do I now write to DG saying this is my understanding of the process and I require them to serve their amended pleadings before my amended and sufficiently particularised defence?

Listings said today it would be prudent for me to acknowledge the DG letter of 3 March.

 

I have just uploaded the 4 pages of the new agreement and a page of my medical evidence (hospital admission).

Is the new agreement the same as Chelsea's?

I signed the new agreement on 14.7.2005 and the diagnosis was in a letter to me from my GP 31.8.2005

I was admitted to hospital for the cancer operation on 3.10.2005

 

Hope this is useful.

 

Kind regards

Mihail

 

OK Mihail

 

Yes, write a short letter to the Solicitors acting and state that until the claimant puts his full statement of case to you (his particularized POC's) how can you possibly file/serve a fully particularized defence in response opposing his claim?

 

I have not seen chelsea's contract.

 

Did you miss any payments under this new agreement and if yes, what was the reason for missing any payments? Were you unable to make payments because of the cancer you were suffering from? Has your cancer been cured, sorry to ask such sensitive questions.

 

Kind Regards

 

The Mould

[Mihail]

Thanks Mould I will write tonight.

Re the illness, yes I did miss payments under the new agreement.

I had some serious cancer surgery in October 2005 and I was not able to work for 6 months following that.

I was self-employed so I had no income and by April 2006 I was so far behind in my mortgage I was facing a repossession action.

I managed to salvage the mortgage by taking out a loan to pay the arrears but not the Managed Loan unfortunately.

 

By September 2006 I was able to work again but by that time the ML arrears had got out of hand and FD had already served the Default Notice 12 February 2006.

 

And I am pleased to say that following the surgery and some subsequent tests, my excellent medical team pronounced me cured, free of further malignant cells.

 

Kind regards

Mihail

[Mihail]

Mould, here is the letter I have drafted to DG to be sent tomorrow

 

" Dear Sirs

 

This is a short letter to you the claimant’s Solicitors and the claimant to state that I do not accept your understanding of the Directions process.

Viz that until the claimant who instigated this claim puts his full statement of case to me (his Particulars of Claim (POC's) how can I possibly file/serve a fully particularized defence in response opposing his claim?

 

I therefore request first, that you as the Solicitors advise the claimant of this fact and second, your claimant serve fully particularised POCs and then I shall file and serve my sufficiently particularized defence to his claim.

 

Yours etc "

 

Do I also say in the letter that I agree to their draft Directions (already uploaded)?

http://s255.photobucket.com/albums/h...20Case%202011/

 

Kind Regards

Mihail

[Mihail]

Urgent question. County Court Hearing on 18th.

Anyone out there?

[Old Cogger]

bump

[Mihail]

Dear Mould or any other CAGers,

 

Urgent: Directions Hearing this Friday

 

Do I agree to their draft Directions (already uploaded)?

http://s255.photobucket.com/albums/h...20Case%202011/

 

Kind regards

Mihail

[Mihail]

Thanks to the Mould's advice, DG have sent me their amended Particulars of Claim and amended Draft Directions, uploaded here

http://s255.photobucket.com/albums/hh128/leonardo4455/First%20Direct%20DG%20Case%202011/?action=organize

 

They have given me 4 weeks to file and serve a fully pleaded defence in 14 days.

 

All comments gratefully received

Thanks in advance

 

Mihail

[The Mould]

Thanks to the Mould's advice, DG have sent me their amended Particulars of Claim and amended Draft Directions, uploaded here

http://s255.photobucket.com/albums/hh128/leonardo4455/First%20Direct%20DG%20Case%202011/?action=organize

 

They have given me 4 weeks to file and serve a fully pleaded defence in 14 days.

 

All comments gratefully received

Thanks in advance

 

Mihail

 

Hello Mihail

 

That link does not work dear fellow, a password is required.

 

4 weeks to file your amended defence in 14 days? Mihail, how's this?

 

Kind Regards

 

The Mould

[Mihail]

Hello Mould

 

Good to hear from you, snowed under as you seem to be!

Sorry I got the link wrong heres the correct one with the updated documents from DG

http://s255.photobucket.com/albums/hh128/leonardo4455/First%20Direct%20DG%20Case%202011/

I feel the 14 days they (DG) are asking for my POC of Defence is too short

28 days would give more time to check their documents, in particular the agreement of the Managed Loan they switched me to on 14.7.2005

Because it was First Direct, the telephone bank, I agreed over the phone to the Managed Loan (although I was given no choice) so I will ask for the Agreement tomorrow

 

Kind regards

Mihail

[Mihail]

Here is the Managed Loan contract supplied, on my request by DG this week

I signed it on 14.7.2006, although I was given no choice in the matter by First Direct.

http://s255.photobucket.com/albums/hh128/leonardo4455/First%20Direct%20DG%20Case%202011/

 

This Agreement, and its validity and lawfulness, will I believe form a part of my Defence, which I am required to serve in 14 days time.

All comments from caggers on this will be most welcome and gratefully received.

 

Kind regards

Mihail

[Mihail]

Update on Directions Hearing today.

In Draft Direction (uploaded, see earlier posts) 3 The District Judge gave me 2 weeks from next Friday to file a Defence

In Draft Direction 3 the DJ deleted the "be debarred from further defending the claim and the claimant be at liberty to apply for judgement in default"

 

I did raise the issue of DG failing to acknowledge that the account was in dispute and them failing to comply with the CPRs and the DJ seemed a little indifferent to these points.

He did say if I had such objections I could make a separate application to the court for an "Unless" order or an order to have the case struck out but I would have to pay a fee.

 

I will seek advice on this on Monday.

In the meantime I shall prepare my particulars of Defence

 

Regards

Mihail

[Mihail]

Dear Caggers

 

Got a post-Directions Hearing letter from DG today uploaded here

http://s255.photobucket.com/albums/hh128/leonardo4455/First%20Direct%20DG%20Case%202011/

They seem to be saying my account can't be in dispute because of the court-Supreme and local County Court-ruling on bank charges.

They also included, following my CPR request, a breakdown of their costs -£4110

 

All views/angles, as ever, gratefully received.

 

Mihail

[uptoeyeballs]

Am I missing something here?

 

Did they terminate on the back of a defective default notice with £50 of arrears?

 

Looks like it to me.......

 

uteb.

[Mihail]

||Am I missing something here?

 

Did they terminate on the back of a defective default notice with £50 of arrears?

 

Looks like it to me.......

 

@uteb All DG have sent me with their POC has been posted.

I'm in the process of filing my Defence.

Do you surmise that this could be part of my Defence?

At present it is on grounds of

1 Account in dispute-bank charges being challenged due to financial hardship

2 Legality of contract of the new Managed Loan

 

All advice gratefully received.

Kind regards

 

Mihial

[uptoeyeballs]

Hi Mihial,

 

I thought they hadn't given you enough time on the default notice, but prior to 19/12/06 they only had to give you 7 days, not 14. So, not what I thought originally.

 

Although I don't know it it'll help/hinder your case, there may be other issues with the DN. Have a look here:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/170345-tale-dodgy-dn.html

 

uteb.

Edited March 29, 2011 by uptoeyeballs
I'm wrong!

[Mihail]

Hi Uteb

Thanks for the link

I've had a look at surfaceagentx20 's argument and as a leyman I'm unsure whether the ineffective DN argument can be used in my case.

I do know that DG have included a Final Demand letter in their POC.

 

Does this make a difference? Does a Final Demand constitute a Notice of Termination as in X20's case?

 

I am drafting my Defence at the moment and will file it in the next seven days.

How detailed does it have to be?

 

Kind regards

Mihail

[Mihail]

Dear CAGGers

 

Here is my draft Defence to be filed to the Court by Friday this week

 

Helpful revisions/ additions from the Mould and Uteb have been included and futher comments to this draft-ideally in the next 24 hours- are as ever most welcome

 

Many thanks and best regards

 

Mihail

 

 

 

DG Solicitors 12 Calthorpe Road Edgbaston Birmingham B15 1QZ

Cc Brighton County Court Listings

 

4 April 2011

 

Dear Sir or Madam,

 

Re: HSBC BANK PLC v MR

 

Outline Defence against Bank Claim for Brighton County Court Hearing

 

1. I XXXX am the Defendant in this action and make the following

statement as my defence to the claim made by HSBC Bank Plc.

 

2 It is not admitted that any or all of the monies claimed are lawfully owing. The Claimant is put to strict proof as to how the sums claimed have been calculated and as to how those sums are lawfully owing.

 

 

3. The Defendant is embarrassed in pleading to the Particulars of

Claim as it stands at present, inter alia: -

 

 

3.1 The Claimant’s Action is ineffective on grounds of Defendant’s financial hardship.

In 2005/2006 as the Claimant knows I, the hereinafter assumed to mean the Defendant, had no income for 6 months, following a successful cancer operation. I have medical proof of this including diagnosis, hospital admission and sick notes from my GP.

In 2010, I was contacted by DG Solicitors, the Claimant’s solicitors, over the outstanding balance and I telephoned them saying I was disputing the charges element but the dispute was being handled via Cartel Claims Management who had gone into liquidation.

I asked for more time to retrieve my charges claim details from the Official Receiver (still not received) and to hand the information to another claims agency

I was told by telephone (not confirmed in writing,) by DG Solicitors in July August and September that their claim would be kept on hold with no further action pending my bank charges information I was requesting from the Official Receiver.

In October 2010 I received a Claim Form from Northampton County Court for the balance.

DG Solicitors have gone back on their word over keeping their claim on hold and I have since insisted on written communication to them and with them

 

3.2 Account in dispute since 2007 with over £4000 worth of bank charges.

The claimant denies this, quoting the Supreme Court verdict and the County Court striking out my individual charges claim in January this year because of the SC decision

I have recently put my charges case to the Financial Ombudsman Service this week on grounds of financial hardship, brought about in 2005 by my need to recover from a successful cancer operation.

I will contend that the charges dispute has legal validity whilst being considered by the FoS and other agencies

I will contend that such charges applied to my account under financial hardship are excessive and disproportionate and put the claimant to strict proof that any such charges applied do indeed reflect the actual damage suffered by him

For example did the claimant have to undertake additional administrative work on my account whereby the charge of, to quote one example, £37.50 is justifiable for any additional admin work carried out on my account as a result of any breach by me.

 

Further, it is denied that any alleged contractual account charges and the contractual interest subsequently applied to those charges which have been claimed are lawfully owing in that it is submitted that the charges are a penalty in that they do not reflect any actual losses sustained by the claimant nor does it reflect realistically any actual costs incurred and so are in breach of the common law and, in any event, unfair within the meaning of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

 

Incorporated within the sum demanded by the Claimant are sums claimed for their administration fees, late payment charges and like provisions. It is denied (if it be alleged) that the Claimant has incurred any such fees and charges, alternatively that such fees and charges if incurred accurately represent sums lost by the Claimant by reason of late payment. The Defendant avers the incorporation of such claims is penal and unenforceable at law.

 

iN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ACCOUNT (CHARGES) the Claimant is required under CPR 31.14:

* a) A schedule setting out each charge in the sum claimed, repayment of which is sought, showing the date, amount, and reason given (if any) for that charge being made;

 

* b) Copies of any statement or other document relied upon as showing that each and every charge has been made;

 

* c) A statement of evidence of all matters relied upon as tending to show that the charges are irrecoverable as penalties or otherwise;

 

* d) Copies of decided cases and other legal materials to be relied upon.

 

If the Claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim will be struck out without further order.

 

 

 

2. The Claimant shall under CPR 31.14 within 14 days of service of this order serve an addendum to the Claimant's schedule, stating in respect of each item claimed;

 

* a) Pursuant to what contractual provision such charge was made, producing a copy of the contractual document relied upon;

 

* b) Whether such charge is accepted to be a penalty, and if not why not;

 

* c) If such charge is alleged to be a pre-estimate of the Claimant's loss incurred by the Defendant's actions (whether or not such action is treated as a breach of contract between the parties), all facts and matters intended to be relied upon as showing that such was a proper estimate of such loss, and all evidence to be adduced at trial as to what the true cost of dealing with the matter was;

 

* d) If such charge is not alleged to be a pre-estimate of the Claimant's loss incurred by the Defendant’s actions then facts and matters intended to be relied upon showing the basis upon which the charge was calculated and all evidence to be adduced at trial as to show that the charge was fair and reasonable.

 

* e) Any witness statements.

 

* f) Copies of decided cases and other legal materials to be relied upon.

 

 

 

3.3 New 2005 Managed Loan Agreement invalid

See Repudiation letter-Exhibit 4- sent to DG Solicitors 3 March 2011, which therein states:

 

The agreement pre 2006, a copy of which the Claimant’s solicitors have eventually supplied, following my letter of request dated 27 October 2011, under Civil Procedure Rules 31.14, was nulled when the Claimant informed me that they were consolidating my accounts into one ‘managed loan’, keeping the same account number but without any banking option for me, the customer.

A ‘managed loan’ where I was not made aware of my rights regarding this new loan and as such, therefore, a loan I believe to be missold.

 

I hereby state that the claimant is in serious breach of the said agreement, fundamental breach of contract by him and that I accept his repudiation of the said agreement, which in law (The Law of Contract) entitles me (the non-breaching party) to treat my obligations under the said agreement as discharged.

 

iN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ACCOUNT (CONFLICTING and INVALID AGREEMENTS):

 

The Claimant, as required by CPR 31.14, shall within 14 days of service of this order send to the Defendant and to the Court:

 

*a) an original agreement -pre the 2006 ‘managed loan’ between the claimant and the defendant: a verified and legible copy of the document mentioned in the Claimant’s Particulars of Claim: (already requested of claimant in letter dated 26 October 2010)

 

 

 

 

3.4 The default notice is ineffective (see Exhibit 2)

Authority :

I need to be absolutely sure on the invalidity of the DN, the DN is dated 12 February ie before April 2006, when, for DNs, the remedy period was 7 days. The arrears figure on the DN is £9868.62 including £4000 plus of charges

 

section 75 Consumer Credit Act 1974

The claimant is also advised of the meaning and effect of section 87 and 88 of the Act and the decision in Woodchester v Swayne.

 

Where it was held:

Allowing the appeal, that the Consumer Credit Act 1974, s 88, required the owner to specify not only the nature of

the breach but the action required to remedy it. It was part of a statute plainly enacted to protect consumers. Since many

regulated agreements would be complex, most hirers would be individuals, and the owner would be in a far better position to

provide precise information about that remedial action, the section should be construed as requiring an accurate statement not

only of the nature of the breach but of the action required to remedy it (subject, it might be, to a de minimis dispensation).

Accordingly, the default notice did not satisfy s 88 and was not effective.

 

4. Consequently, I deny all allegations on the particulars of

claim and put the claimant to strict proof thereof.

 

 

 

The defendant respectfully requests the right to amend his defence subject to the information received in points 1-4 above.

 

Yours faithfully

[The Mould]

Dear CAGGers

 

Here is my draft Defence to be filed to the Court by Friday this week

 

Helpful revisions/ additions from the Mould and Uteb have been included and futher comments to this draft-ideally in the next 24 hours- are as ever most welcome

 

Many thanks and best regards

 

Mihail

 

 

 

DG Solicitors 12 Calthorpe Road Edgbaston Birmingham B15 1QZ

Cc Brighton County Court Listings

 

4 April 2011

 

Dear Sir or Madam,

 

Re: HSBC BANK PLC v MR

 

Outline Defence against Bank Claim for Brighton County Court Hearing

 

1. I XXXX am the Defendant in this action and make the following

statement as my defence to the claim made by HSBC Bank Plc.

 

2 It is not admitted that any or all of the monies claimed are lawfully owing. The Claimant is put to strict proof as to how the sums claimed have been calculated and as to how those sums are lawfully owing.

 

 

3. The Defendant is embarrassed in pleading to the Particulars of

Claim as it stands at present, inter alia: -

 

 

3.1 The Claimant’s Action is ineffective on grounds of Defendant’s financial hardship.

In 2005/2006 as the Claimant knows I, the hereinafter assumed to mean the Defendant, had no income for 6 months, following a successful cancer operation. I have medical proof of this including diagnosis, hospital admission and sick notes from my GP.

In 2010, I was contacted by DG Solicitors, the Claimant’s solicitors, over the outstanding balance and I telephoned them saying I was disputing the charges element but the dispute was being handled via Cartel Claims Management who had gone into liquidation.

I asked for more time to retrieve my charges claim details from the Official Receiver (still not received) and to hand the information to another claims agency

I was told by telephone (not confirmed in writing,) by DG Solicitors in July August and September that their claim would be kept on hold with no further action pending my bank charges information I was requesting from the Official Receiver.

In October 2010 I received a Claim Form from Northampton County Court for the balance.

DG Solicitors have gone back on their word over keeping their claim on hold and I have since insisted on written communication to them and with them

 

3.2 Account in dispute since 2007 with over £4000 worth of bank charges.

The claimant denies this, quoting the Supreme Court verdict and the County Court striking out my individual charges claim in January this year because of the SC decision

I have recently put my charges case to the Financial Ombudsman Service this week on grounds of financial hardship, brought about in 2005 by my need to recover from a successful cancer operation.

I will contend that the charges dispute has legal validity whilst being considered by the FoS and other agencies

I will contend that such charges applied to my account under financial hardship are excessive and disproportionate and put the claimant to strict proof that any such charges applied do indeed reflect the actual damage suffered by him

For example did the claimant have to undertake additional administrative work on my account whereby the charge of, to quote one example, £37.50 is justifiable for any additional admin work carried out on my account as a result of any breach by me.

 

Further, it is denied that any alleged contractual account charges and the contractual interest subsequently applied to those charges which have been claimed are lawfully owing in that it is submitted that the charges are a penalty in that they do not reflect any actual losses sustained by the claimant nor does it reflect realistically any actual costs incurred and so are in breach of the common law and, in any event, unfair within the meaning of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

 

Incorporated within the sum demanded by the Claimant are sums claimed for their administration fees, late payment charges and like provisions. It is denied (if it be alleged) that the Claimant has incurred any such fees and charges, alternatively that such fees and charges if incurred accurately represent sums lost by the Claimant by reason of late payment. The Defendant avers the incorporation of such claims is penal and unenforceable at law.

 

iN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ACCOUNT (CHARGES) the Claimant is required under CPR 31.14:

* a) A schedule setting out each charge in the sum claimed, repayment of which is sought, showing the date, amount, and reason given (if any) for that charge being made;

 

* b) Copies of any statement or other document relied upon as showing that each and every charge has been made;

 

* c) A statement of evidence of all matters relied upon as tending to show that the charges are irrecoverable as penalties or otherwise;

 

* d) Copies of decided cases and other legal materials to be relied upon.

 

If the Claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim will be struck out without further order.

 

 

 

2. The Claimant shall under CPR 31.14 within 14 days of service of this order serve an addendum to the Claimant's schedule, stating in respect of each item claimed;

 

* a) Pursuant to what contractual provision such charge was made, producing a copy of the contractual document relied upon;

 

* b) Whether such charge is accepted to be a penalty, and if not why not;

 

* c) If such charge is alleged to be a pre-estimate of the Claimant's loss incurred by the Defendant's actions (whether or not such action is treated as a breach of contract between the parties), all facts and matters intended to be relied upon as showing that such was a proper estimate of such loss, and all evidence to be adduced at trial as to what the true cost of dealing with the matter was;

 

* d) If such charge is not alleged to be a pre-estimate of the Claimant's loss incurred by the Defendant’s actions then facts and matters intended to be relied upon showing the basis upon which the charge was calculated and all evidence to be adduced at trial as to show that the charge was fair and reasonable.

 

* e) Any witness statements.

 

* f) Copies of decided cases and other legal materials to be relied upon.

 

 

 

3.3 New 2005 Managed Loan Agreement invalid

See Repudiation letter-Exhibit 4- sent to DG Solicitors 3 March 2011, which therein states:

 

The agreement pre 2006, a copy of which the Claimant’s solicitors have eventually supplied, following my letter of request dated 27 October 2011, under Civil Procedure Rules 31.14, was nulled when the Claimant informed me that they were consolidating my accounts into one ‘managed loan’, keeping the same account number but without any banking option for me, the customer.

A ‘managed loan’ where I was not made aware of my rights regarding this new loan and as such, therefore, a loan I believe to be missold.

 

I hereby state that the claimant is in serious breach of the said agreement, fundamental breach of contract by him and that I accept his repudiation of the said agreement, which in law (The Law of Contract) entitles me (the non-breaching party) to treat my obligations under the said agreement as discharged.

 

iN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED ACCOUNT (CONFLICTING and INVALID AGREEMENTS):

 

The Claimant, as required by CPR 31.14, shall within 14 days of service of this order send to the Defendant and to the Court:

 

*a) an original agreement -pre the 2006 ‘managed loan’ between the claimant and the defendant: a verified and legible copy of the document mentioned in the Claimant’s Particulars of Claim: (already requested of claimant in letter dated 26 October 2010)

 

 

 

 

3.4 The default notice is ineffective (see Exhibit 2)

Authority :

I need to be absolutely sure on the invalidity of the DN, the DN is dated 12 February ie before April 2006, when, for DNs, the remedy period was 7 days. The arrears figure on the DN is £9868.62 including £4000 plus of charges

 

section 75 Consumer Credit Act 1974

The claimant is also advised of the meaning and effect of section 87 and 88 of the Act and the decision in Woodchester v Swayne.

 

Where it was held:

Allowing the appeal, that the Consumer Credit Act 1974, s 88, required the owner to specify not only the nature of

the breach but the action required to remedy it. It was part of a statute plainly enacted to protect consumers. Since many

regulated agreements would be complex, most hirers would be individuals, and the owner would be in a far better position to

provide precise information about that remedial action, the section should be construed as requiring an accurate statement not

only of the nature of the breach but of the action required to remedy it (subject, it might be, to a de minimis dispensation).

Accordingly, the default notice did not satisfy s 88 and was not effective.

 

4. Consequently, I deny all allegations on the particulars of

claim and put the claimant to strict proof thereof.

 

 

 

The defendant respectfully requests the right to amend his defence subject to the information received in points 1-4 above.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Good evening Mihail

 

With respect my dear fellow, the above defence is going to need a Bionic makeover. I do not have the time at present Mihail, to perform the neccessary operation required to reinforce your position, I shall try and make time over the next day or two to read through your case again and see what can be done.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

[The Mould]

Mihail, if you pick up your e-mail notifications, when you read this particular post, come back on-line immediately please, time is of the essence and the man-made clock of hours will not wait.

 

I am going to go through your defence right now, the defence that your posted up Mihail, I want you to scrap it and then we can start over with your new defence.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

[The Mould]

OK Mihail

 

Lay your defence out in this format:

 

Put a header on your A4 paperwork and type the following into the header:

Mr Mihail (Defendant)

Defence

Exhibits (use your initials, i.e John Smith would be - 'JS', so if your name is Mihail Gorbechov, your Exhibits would be - Exhibits 'MG', if you have 5 documents that you rely upon as evidence in support of your defence, then you would number your Exhibits 'MG1', 'MG2' and so on through to number 5)

Date: (put date)

 

When you have typed that into the header, move it to top right hand corner and then come out of header.

 

Then continue to draft your defence like this:

 

In the Brighton County Court

Claim no. xxxxxxxxxxxx (put the claim number Mihail)

Claimant: HSBC Bank Plc

Ref: (put the claimant's ref, if he has one)

Defendant: Mr Mihail

Date: (put the date)

 

DEFENCE

I, Mr Mihail, age 30 years of (put your full address, including post code) am the defendant in these proceedings and I make this statement in response to this action brought by the claimant.

Back in a few mins Mihail.

Kind regards

The Mould

[The Mould]

Mihail dear fellow

 

I need you to concentrate because I am going to ask you some questions and I need you to give me the specific details in your answers, I am simply asking these questions Mihail in order to gain knowledge that you have on your case and this will help me to help you to draft your defence.

 

I want you to take me back to the year 2005, the year of your operation to treat/remove the cancer.

 

You say that you needed 6 months after said operation for recovery time, so, what happened between you and the claimant (HSBC) in the previous 6 months in respect of your normal monthly payments?

 

What was your normal monthly payments before you fell into arrears and how many months of missed payments were there before HSBC issued said Default notice (12/02/2006)?

 

You say that there is £4,000.00 worth of charges added to the figure stated on said Default notice, the Default notice is demanding £9,000.00 odd £pounds in order to remedy, what is the actual amount that was owing on the account at the time of said Default notice being served upon you?

 

I am going to re-read through your case, if I have any further questions, then I shall post them up for you.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

[The Mould]

Mihail

 

The said DN is demanding £50, sorry I made a mistake.

 

How did this managed loan (fixed sum loan agreement) come about Mihail, said agreement is dated 12 July 2005 and it looks as though you have signed it, it states that the amount of borrowing is £9,908.34, period of borrowing is 12 months at £100.00 per month, to start 1 September 2005 and the final payment will be the outstanding balance and interest which must be paid on 1 September 2006.

 

What amount was owing to HSBC before this managed loan was executed? Did you really understand the terms of this new contract Mihail?

 

I need those details Mihail.

 

Your case is not comparable to the circumstances of 'chelsea101's case'.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

[The Mould]

Good morning Mihail

 

In 2005 you had three (3) accounts, can you please say what these accounts were and how much was owing on said accounts BEFORE you agreed to said managed loan account.

 

How did the bank (HSBC) respond to your financial difficulties, was the bank fully aware of your ill health due to cancer?

 

Mihail, did you understand that the last payment due under said agreement was going to be £9,000.00 odd £pounds, how did you expect to make such a substantial payment, how did the bank expect you to be able to afford such a substantial payment?

 

Come back, Roger - over.

 

Kind regards

 

The Mould

[Mihail]

Morning my dear Mould

 

Sorry I missed your earlier request, I didnt get the usual CAG email notification.

Here's some answers

 

||What amount was owing to HSBC before this managed loan was executed? Did you really understand the terms of this new contract Mihail?

£9,908.34, a consolidation of the previous 3 accounts, which I think were Loan, Current and Credit Card

 

||How did the bank (HSBC) respond to your financial difficulties, was the bank fully aware of your ill health due to cancer?

I got advice from the CAB and the bank , whom I had made aware of my difficulties and illness, agreed I paid £1 a month during my 6 months of sickness and financial difficulty, whicjh I paid

 

||Mihail, did you understand that the last payment due under said agreement was going to be £9,000.00 odd £pounds, how did you expect to make such a substantial payment, how did the bank expect you to be able to afford such a substantial payment?

No Mould I didnt, I thought they were consolidating everything so it was simplified and all I needed to pay was £100 a month/£1 a month during sickness.

I don't know how the bank expected me to pay this.

I don't think I was paying proper attention to the bank terms during my illness (cancer op 13 October 2005, signed as sick with GP until July 2006) and the period of financial hardhsip

 

Hope this helps

Kind regards

Mihail