Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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
      • 160 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

In reply to my CCA request HSBC quoting Carey v HSBC 2009 what now?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4671 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 All

 

We have got in to difficulty repaying my wife's credit card after I had a back operation and then had a heart attact . We are now surving on disabilty benefits.

 

We have been making token payments regularly. HSBC had agreed to these payments albeit saying that normal collections procedures will continue. This was after I had wrote asking for the debt to be written off and following that suppied them with a budget statement

 

She was then issued with a default notice, I took advice from the forum and asked for the original credit card agreement

 

HSBC replied that they did not have original but sent reconstituted copy, T&Cs, variation and statement of account . I then sent another letter asking them to confirm that they did not have the original signed agreement

 

They sent me back a letter saying they had complied with Section 78 by supplying copies and in light of the recent High Court decision in Carey v HSBC 2009 they had satified my request and they see no merit in my continued insistence that the documents supplied are in breach of the CCA

 

They have now passed my wifes case to Metropolitan and she has recieved their standard recovery letter and the 1st phone call

 

How does she stand at the moment in the light of the Carey v HSBC letter and what is her (our) next step

 

We understand that we owe this money and have always in the last 25 years paid the amount due on the card, but with me now out of work and my wife caring for me we cannot afford their payments

 

Any advice would be gratefully received

Link to post
Share on other sites

They can do this to satisfy a s.78 request but they still need the original at court, Also you could put them to strict proof that these are the correct terms and conditions that would have been in place at that time.....

 

I would like to know how they would do that.

 

If they have stated that they may take you to court - you can then send a CPR 31.16 letter asking for all info on which they intend to rely upon - you cant send these willy nilly so wait for the threat....

 

 

Civil Procedure Rules (31.16)

 

(1)This rule applies where an application is made to the court under any Act for disclosure before proceedings have started1.

 

(2)The application must be supported by evidence. (Hence - wait for the threat)

 

(3)The court may make an order under this rule only where –

 

(a)the respondent is likely to be a party to subsequent proceedings;

 

(b)the applicant is also likely to be a party to those proceedings;

 

©if proceedings had started, the respondent’s duty by way of standard disclosure, set out in rule 31.6, would extend to the documents or classes of documents of which the applicant seeks disclosure; and

 

(d)disclosure before proceedings have started is desirable in order to –

 

(i)dispose fairly of the anticipated proceedings;

 

(ii)assist the dispute to be resolved without proceedings; or

 

(iii)save costs.

 

(4)An order under this rule must –

 

(a)specify the documents or the classes of documents which the respondent must disclose; and

 

(b)require him, when making disclosure, to specify any of those documents –

 

(i)which are no longer in his control; or

 

(ii)in respect of which he claims a right or duty to withhold inspection.

 

(5)Such an order may –

 

(a)require the respondent to indicate what has happened to any documents which are no longer in his control; and

 

(b)specify the time and place for disclosure and inspection.

Edited by rdm2006

HTH (Hope This Helps) RDM2006

 

THE FORCE (OF CAG) IS WITH YOU

;)

 

We've Helped You To Claim - Now Help Us Remain

A live Site - Make a Donation

 

All advice and opinions given by people on this site are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, please seek qualified professional legal Help.

 

However, if you have found any advice you have been given helpful.

Why not show your gratitude And

Click the * on the post you found helpful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi mick

 

What they didn't tell you, was that it also stated in Carey v HSBC (2009) that if the agreement has been 'Varied' i.e. the interest rate has been increased by the creditor, then the creditor has to provide a Copy of the Original Agreement as well as T&C at the time of request.

 

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2009/3417.html

 

Theres a summary at the bottom, but it might be an idea to go through the lot. 234 (4).

 

HSBC like to 'Cherry Pick'.

 

No doubt the interest rate has been 'Varied' many times.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi rdm2006 and rebel11

 

Thank you both for your reply's.

 

rdm2006, so if they need the original for a court appearance and do not seem to have it, I presume they are playing games and trying to put pressure on?

 

rebel11, I started to read through the whole of the case but got bogged and lost the thread of it, but read and understood 234 (4)

 

What do you suggest that I do now? Would it be wise to reply to HSBC quoting 234 (4) and asking for the original CCA to be sent?

 

Also, is my case "in dispute"? If so can I reply to Metropolitan requesting them to cease contact as it is in dispute and HSBC cannot pass the case on to DCA

 

I would like to get to the stage where a firm offer of repayments or a full and final amount is reached. We have been paying a nominal sum each month (this is all we can afford) which HSBC are now rejecting by passing it over to Metropolitan

 

Look forward to your reply

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mick

 

I'm inclined to send HSBC, the following letter :- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?436-Failure-to-provide-a-copy-of-the-agreement-within-the-prescribed-timescale.

 

I'm inclined to send Met, the following letter :- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?426-A-letter-when-the-account-has-been-passed-to-another-debt-collection-agency

 

Try not to get into paper tennis with these companies.

Send the letters Recorded.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi rebel11

 

Any thoughts on post No 10? It is a reply from HSBC after sending the letter you suggested in the following post

 

Thanks, Mike

 

 

 

Hi Mick

 

I'm inclined to send HSBC, the following letter :- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?436-Failure-to-provide-a-copy-of-the-agreement-within-the-prescribed-timescale.

 

I'm inclined to send Met, the following letter :- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?426-A-letter-when-the-account-has-been-passed-to-another-debt-collection-agency

 

Try not to get into paper tennis with these companies.

Send the letters Recorded.

Link to post
Share on other sites

File it, wait to see if you get something different from the room along the corridor (metro).

 

The ball is in there court at present, you have shown youre not to be hoodwinked by their use of their test case Carey vs HSBC :-)

 

S.

Hi Shadow

Thanks for the reply will wait around to see what happens

Mike

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi Shadow

 

Sent off the 2 letters one to Metro and one to HSBC as you suggested and have received from Metro the following letters:- http://i936.photobucket.com/albums/ad204/mcork/Metroscans12.jpg and http://i936.photobucket.com/albums/ad204/mcork/Metroscans.jpg

 

Can I CCA Metro to either get them off my back or to push them further or just ignore?

 

My wife is still paying a token payment each month.She would like to continue this to show she is not running away from her debts, but is just not in a position to pay the minimum payment, is this ok to continue?

 

Look forward to your reply

 

Mike

Edited by mickthespur
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Shadow

 

Sent off the 2 letters one to Metro and one to HSBC as you suggested and have received from Metro the following letters:- http://i936.photobucket.com/albums/ad204/mcork/Metroscans12.jpg and http://i936.photobucket.com/albums/ad204/mcork/Metroscans.jpg

 

Can I CCA Metro to either get them off my back or to push them further or just ignore?

 

My wife is still paying a token payment each month.She would like to continue this to show she is not running away from her debts, but is just not in a position to pay the minimum payment, is this ok to continue?

 

Look forward to your reply

 

Mike

 

Personally i think its at a standstill, they have "noted" your arguments but wont counter them :-D so they think they can continue to carry on regardless. as to token payments...I've had same letter from metro and ignored it and carried on paying token amounts and still am.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Shadow

 

Thank you for the very quick reply. Will carry on with the token payments and wait for the next stage, I imagine will be DG, will let you know as and when things develop, once again thanks

 

Mike

 

Yep had a letter from them too... just sent them the same offer as I'm paying and carried on paying... 3 months down the line now :-D

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Just a follow up for those interested 3 months or so on now and my wife is still paying token payments. She had one letter from Metro asking her to set up a agreement with them to pay token payment each month by a certain date etc.

 

This we ignored and have carried on with token payments, no more so far has been heard.

 

Would really like them to respond with an offer to clear the debt, but will not hold our breath

 

Thanks to Shadow and others for their advice will update if any thing else arises

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Yes obviously because you are acknowledging the debt each time you pay however you will clear the debt and it will be done with.. if you look at the results from court reports recently not having the agreement is not always a bar to getting a judgement and its certainly no bar on someone taking you to court. I'd rather settle outside of court and possible costs if it was me.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...