Jump to content
  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sorry to hear about the "playground insults".    The fact you didn't write "without prejudice" means the letter could be produced in court, not that the PPCs ever seem to do so.  Well, so what?  Minister Baywatch HAVE made up fictitious charges.  Courts HAVE told the PPCs off for this numerous times.  DDJ Harvey DID go ballistic about this.  I don't' see what's wrong in refuting a claim and referring to a persuasive court case to back up your position. 
    • Thanks Dx. I have tidied the defence up with your suggestions amended. Does it look right now? Thanks!   1.    Monies due under current account facility xxxxxxxxxxxx. The claimants claim is for the balance outstanding under the facility provided by Halifax to the defendant. It was a term of the bank account that any debit balance would be repayable by the defendant in full on demand.   2.    The defendant has failed to repay the amount due following the service of a demand.   3.    The debt was assigned to the claimant.   4.    The claimant therefore claims 1. 5k 2. costs   Defence   1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.     2. The Claimants statement of case fails to give adequate information to enable me to properly assess my position with regards the claim.    3. The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim fail to state when the agreement was entered into.   4. Paragraph 1, Whilst I accept that I have in the past held a current account with Halifax Bank Plc. I have not serviced this account since 08/07/2016 due to the punitive charges and interest being applied which made the account untenable and impossible to facilitate. The amount claimed is far in excess of any agreed overdraft limit with Halifax Bank. I deny that the account exceeded an agreed overdraft limit due to overdrawing of funds and claim that this is a result of unfair and extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. It is therefore denied that I am indebted for any alleged outstanding residue.    5. Paragraph 2 is denied as the original creditor has failed to serve a Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand / Recall Notice and the Claimant is put to strict proof to evidence any breach.    6. Paragraph 2 is further denied as i am unaware of Halifax Bank ever providing me with a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand / Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.   7. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am not aware or ever receiving any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925. It is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.   8. Paragraph 4 is denied. I refute the claimants claim is owed or payable. The amount claimed is comprised of amongst others default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, missed or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbeyicon National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.   9. As per Civil Procedure icon Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.     a. Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, which this claim is based on. b. Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification. c. Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed. d. Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim. (f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.   e. Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.   10. On receipt of this claim I immediately requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request, which was received by the Claimant on the *******. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request. Therefore the claimant in their non compliance to my requests have frustrated my attempts to clarify their claim and against pre action protocol should be considered when the question of costs arise.     11. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.    
    • MPs are pushing authorities to respond to allegations of potential fraud at certain banks, whereby it’s claimed home repossession documents weren’t actually signed by the authorised signatory View the full article
    • Thanks Dx. Amended defence set out below. Does it look right now?   1. By agreement between the defendant and Halifax on or around the 3/3/2015 (the agreement) Halifax agreed to loan the defendant monies.     2.The defendant did not pay instalments as they fell due.     3.The agreement was terminated following a service of a default notice.     4.The agreement was assigned to the claimant.     5.The claimant therefore claims 1. 4.5k 2. Costs    Defence   1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (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 October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.     3. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is accepted that I have had financial dealings with Halifax in the past. However I do not recall entering into any financial agreement with Halifax on or around 03/03/2015 and have sought verification from the claimant who has not complied with my request for further information.     4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am not aware of any payment terms for the stated agreement.     5. Paragraph 3 is denied. It is denied that Cabot Financial served any Default notice on the Defendant pursuant to s87 Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Claimant is required to prove that a compliant Default Notice was served upon the Defendant. The Claimant is required to prove that the any Default notice relied upon complied with the requirements of s88(4A) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and that the notice was in the prescribed form as required by The Consumer Credit Enforcement Default and Termination Notice Regulations 1983.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied as I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served by either the claimant or the original creditor.     7. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant; the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of credit agreement / assignment / balance / breach requested by CPR 31.14, and remains in default of my section 77 request, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   a. Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and   b. Show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and   c. Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim     8. On receipt of this claim I requested by way of Royal Mail on 13/10/20 a CPR 31.14 request from the claimant’s solicitors and a section 77 requests to the Claimant, for copies of the documents referred to within the Claimant’s particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date the Claimant has failed to comply with my section 77 request and their solicitors, Mortimer Clarke, have refused my CPR 31.14 request.     9. As per Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.     10. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82 A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974     11. 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.  
    • I'm generally convinced that there is at least 2 users on MSE that's in my thread that has friends or family or even themselves that have similar line of work to MB or Gladstone.   I don't mind different opinions but they're just throwing out playground insults to me for using that letter saying I'm stupid, prat, idiot etc etc for doing it and not including in the letter without prejudice so it can't be used against me in court. I think I'll leave MSE and just stick with CAG and in this case.    
  • Our picks

    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies
    • Oven repair. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/427690-oven-repair/&do=findComment&comment=5073391
      • 49 replies
    • I came across this discussion recently and just wanted to give my experience of A Shade Greener that may help others regarding their boiler finance agreement.
       
      We had a 10yr  finance contract for a boiler fitted July 2015.
       
      After a summer of discontent with ASG I discovered that if you have paid HALF the agreement or more you can legally return the boiler to them at no cost to yourself. I've just returned mine the feeling is liberating.
       
      It all started mid summer during lockdown when they refused to service our boiler because we didn't have a loft ladder or flooring installed despite the fact AS installed the boiler. and had previosuly serviced it without issue for 4yrs. After consulting with an independent installer I was informed that if this was the case then ASG had breached building regulations,  this was duly reported to Gas Safe to investigate and even then ASG refused to accept blame and repeatedly said it was my problem. Anyway Gas Safe found them in breach of building regs and a compromise was reached.
       
      A month later and ASG attended to service our boiler but in the process left the boiler unusuable as it kept losing pressure not to mention they had damaged the filling loop in the process which they said was my responsibilty not theres and would charge me to repair, so generous of them! Soon after reporting the fault I got a letter stating it was time we arranged a powerflush on our heating system which they make you do after 5 years even though there's nothing in the contract that states this. Coincidence?
       
      After a few heated exchanges with ASG (pardon the pun) I decided to pull the plug and cancel our agreement.
       
      The boiler was removed and replaced by a reputable installer,  and the old boiler was returned to ASG thus ending our contract with them. What's mad is I saved in excess of £1000 in the long run and got a new boiler with a brand new 12yr warranty. 
       
      You only have to look at TrustPilot to get an idea of what this company is like.
       
      • 3 replies
    • Dazza a few months ago I discovered a good friend of mine who had ten debts with cards and catalogues which he was slavishly paying off at detriment to his own family quality of life, and I mean hardship, not just absence of second holidays or flat screen TV's.
       
      I wrote to all his creditors asking for supporting documents and not one could provide any material that would allow them to enforce the debt.
       
      As a result he stopped paying and they have been unable to do anything, one even admitted it was unenforceable.
       
      If circumstances have got to the point where you are finding it unmanageable you must ask yourself why you feel the need to pay.  I guarantee you that these companies have built bad debt into their business model and no one over there is losing any sleep over your debt to them!  They will see you as a victim and cash cow and they will be reluctant to discuss final offers, only ways to keep you paying with threats of court action or seizing your assets if you have any.
       
      They are not your friends and you owe them no loyalty or moral duty, that must remain only for yourself and your family.
       
      If it was me I would send them all a CCA request.   I would bet that not one will provide the correct response and you can quite legally stop paying them until such time as they do provide a response.   Even when they do you should check back here as they mostly send dodgy photo copies or generic rubbish that has no connection with your supposed debt.
       
      The money you are paying them should, as far as you are able, be put to a savings account for yourself and as a means of paying of one of these fleecers should they ever manage to get to to the point of a successful court judgement.  After six years they will not be able to start court action and that money will then become yours.
       
      They will of course pursue you for the funds and pass your file around various departments of their business and out to third parties.
       
      Your response is that you should treat it as a hobby.  I have numerous files of correspondence each faithfully organised showing the various letters from different DCA;s , solicitors etc with a mix of threats, inducements and offers.   It is like my stamp collection and I show it to anyone who is interested!
        • Thanks
        • Like

Dlr V HSBC


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 5144 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone,

 

I posted last night to say that I was unsure my letters had been received as I just addressed them to the 'Bank Manager' by First Class post no receipt. I was about to start all over again when I got an offer this morning which caught me by suprise. I've been offered £750 from a claim of £833.50 charges, the letter said that interest (£251.66 totalling £1085.16) won't be refunded as it is a condition of the overdraft. My argument will be that if I had not been charged in the first place I would not have had interest to pay on the £833.50. If anyone can word it better than me I'd be obliged.

 

What caught me off guard is I've only sent the pre lim letter and the LBA. The letter they sent says I entered into a contract and was aware of the charges etc and they believe they would successfully defend any legal challenge. Their offer is because they 'are mindful of management and irrevocable costs that it may incur in relation to a claim'.

 

I was thinking off rejecting the offer and going for the full amount. and giving another 14 days response time before I start procededings.

 

Has anyone else had an offer from HSBC at the LBA stage and did they reject or accept it?

 

My worry is to lose the £750 by being greedy for the £1085.

 

Cheers

 

 

HSBC Pre lim letter 12th August 2006 £1085.16 - Ignored

LBA sent 2nd Septemer 2006 £1088.65 - Offered £750

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I have just had the same letter you got, offering a smaller amount that I asked for. If they are prepared to offer as much as they have, then it won't hurt them to go all the way and refund everything you have asked for.

 

I will be accepting their offer in PART PAYMENT, and will amend the bit on the letter (that I have to sign accepting their offer) to show that I will accept the offer so far but will continue to claim the rest in court if I have to.

 

No reason to give them any extra time, you gave them 14 days, I assume when you sent the LBA. Tell them your original deadline still stands.

 

Good luck!

HSBC:

Data Protection Act S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 23/5

Prelim request sent 18/8 - ignored

LBA sent 6/9 - offer made, but it's not good enough!

Full offer received 19/9/06 :D

 

 

Barclaycard:

Data Protection Act S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 23/5

Info dating back to May 2004 received 3/6

40 day deadline is up on 4/7

Information Commissioner had to intervene, got most of the statements I asked for but some still missing.

19 March 2007 Starting on them PROPERLY (at last!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just printed my version of that letter... has taken me ages to find it! Should have hung on and waited for your post Michael!!!

HSBC:

Data Protection Act S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 23/5

Prelim request sent 18/8 - ignored

LBA sent 6/9 - offer made, but it's not good enough!

Full offer received 19/9/06 :D

 

 

Barclaycard:

Data Protection Act S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 23/5

Info dating back to May 2004 received 3/6

40 day deadline is up on 4/7

Information Commissioner had to intervene, got most of the statements I asked for but some still missing.

19 March 2007 Starting on them PROPERLY (at last!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya,

 

thats interesting, never thought of accepting as part offer. I've been mulling over what to do and I've decided to reject it and go for gold. The fact they have made an offer suggests they are willing to pay the lot. Just about got the letter together in my head and now gonna get it on paper. Fingers crossed

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good for you! ;) Let us know how you get on...

HSBC:

Data Protection Act S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 23/5

Prelim request sent 18/8 - ignored

LBA sent 6/9 - offer made, but it's not good enough!

Full offer received 19/9/06 :D

 

 

Barclaycard:

Data Protection Act S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 23/5

Info dating back to May 2004 received 3/6

40 day deadline is up on 4/7

Information Commissioner had to intervene, got most of the statements I asked for but some still missing.

19 March 2007 Starting on them PROPERLY (at last!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys its your money.If a burglar emptied your house and them comes back and offers half your stuff back as long as you dont take him to court , would you be happy ?

Case Statistics 13 Wins - 0 Losses

Cases In Progress 2

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone,

 

I've just finished my letter rejecting the £750 I was offered as final settlement of my £1088.65 claim. I did consider accepting it as a part offer but decided against that. I said I was confident that I would be successful in my action against HSBC for the full amount, I've also updated the interest and told them I will be adding 24p a day until judgement or a full settlement which ever happens first.

 

I feel like David v Goliath........ now where did I put that slingshot?

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

sounds like you have things under control, keep us posted

HSBC- £4995, settled payment in full

if you found this post helpful, please click the scales (top right of post), ta ;)

 

if you're not sure what to do?, Read the FAQ's

Unsure about what to claim, or confused about overdraft interest? Charges explanation

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Will accepting an offer as part payment effect your claim?

:cool:

Account 1(mine) & 2 (Joint)

01/09/06 Subject Access Request sent - Hand Delivered

8/09/06 Prelim letter issued

03/10/06 LBA sent recorded delivery

17/10/06 Partial settlement offered

18/10/06 MCOL Raised

21/11/06 - Settled in FULL!!!

Account 3 (Partners)

01/09/06 Subject Access Request sent - Hand Delivered

02/10/06 Prelim letter issued

17/10/06 Partial settlement offered

18/10/06 LBA sent recorded delivery

27/01/06 MCOL Raised

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the same offer which I accepted in part settlement and informed them that I still wanted the remaining monies. On Saturday I received the standard letter which suggests I contact the ombudsman. Guess that means I won't get the partial payment then! LOL

 

Their 14 days is up tomorrow so I'll file against them - they're not having any longer!

HSBC - 2 accounts - £5016.44 - WON!

 

Now going after them for my husbands account - £283.30. Prelim letter sent 26th October 2006.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Good luck! I read elsewhere in this forum that they direct you to the ombudsman, so that seems to be a standard response. I thought the ombudsman were saught if you were seeking compensation not claiming back what's rightfully yours......!

:cool:

Account 1(mine) & 2 (Joint)

01/09/06 Subject Access Request sent - Hand Delivered

8/09/06 Prelim letter issued

03/10/06 LBA sent recorded delivery

17/10/06 Partial settlement offered

18/10/06 MCOL Raised

21/11/06 - Settled in FULL!!!

Account 3 (Partners)

01/09/06 Subject Access Request sent - Hand Delivered

02/10/06 Prelim letter issued

17/10/06 Partial settlement offered

18/10/06 LBA sent recorded delivery

27/01/06 MCOL Raised

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I file my MCOL to Colin Langdale as he is the only named person who I have on my replies. He's Senior Service Quality Officer although the signature on the letters is PP. ALso can I add a claim now for the interest I have been charged on the overdraft charges even though I never mentioned it in my opening letter but did in my LBA? I don't mean the 8% for the charges, as I kept increasing my overdraft to keep afloat and so have been paying interest all these years and not clearing the OD if that makes sense.

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

I told them I wasn't contacting the ombudsman but would proceed with my action. I received a letter this morning again suggesting the ombudsman and no mention of the original offer! Rubbing it in a bit with the last line, they put 'I accept this letter will not provide the response that you hoped for'.......... too right it doesn't. ha ha to you too.

 

Filing my OLMC Saturday. GET READY.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for that fella's. No I didn't mention it in the LBA just in the letter rejecting their offer of £400 less than my claim. I said that unless I received the full amount in 14 days I would file an action and include overdraft interest. Oh well not to worry i never imagined I would get a penny 3 months ago so I'd be satisfied with my original amount.

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hold on, as long as you've mentioned it in a letter to them, LBA or not,then there's no reason why you shouldn't claim it at moneyclaim.

 

Once you've filed and know your claim no. send MCOL 2 copies of your revised schedule of charges clearly marked with your name and claim no. and a copy to the bank

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've added the extra interest when I started my MCOL but I can't figure out how to use the spreadsheet. I've worked it out on a day to day basis similar to the 8% which has added £500 + £120 costs to my original claim. If they had paid up on my initial letter they would have saved £620. Greedy b*%!&$%s.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...