how to take legal action against hsbc?

[Mike_hawk]

Litigation isn't without that risk Nod

[Durkin]

 

They refer to you again Durkin, saying your case is Scottish blah blah but they didnt reply to my letter to them involving the other cases your case was based on on the 7th Nov 2012.

 

I shall reply to them next week now with my side as well to "save costs on postage" lol.

 

Letter attached.

 

Durkin they mention that your case went for Appeal in June 2010. What was the outcome and who appealed?

 

Hi Noddy,

 

You're dealing with muppets. Once they get Counsel involved, they'll be advised that they're onto a loser.

 

The Court of Session, while betraying me personally, still confirmed that £8K of damages is reasonable, simply for damaging creditworthiness (variant of defamation - no proof required). I really wouldn't try and provide proof. It isn't required and will only give the bank further wool to pull over the judges eyes.

 

The Supreme Court will straighten out the other shenanigans that went on here in Scotland.

 

HFC know they're in for a kicking there against me. It's part of the HSBC group. They should know the case very well. Counsel will confirm to them that my case is being appealed in the Supreme Court and I wouldn't be surprised if they increased your offer.

 

I'd love you to stick this out though. You have them on the ropes and countless others will benefit from the judgement.

 

I really can't see you losing, but yes, it's possible and you'd be liable for expenses. Normally you'd have about 14 days to appeal any dodgy judgement. The appeals in Aberdeen go to the sheriff principal so I guess you'd be appealing to the top judge in Nottingham.

 

In the unlikely event that you'd be liable for expenses, the JSA claim may offer protection anyway.

 

Do us all a favour please and send these bullies to hell.

 

God is on your side.

 

Richard.

[noddy997]

Cheers for the kind words Richard.

 

Just before I read your reply, I read Mike's and remembered about the JSA! Lol! So hopefully I will be covered from that.

 

What exactly is Counsel? I take it its something external as you said the Counsel will tell them they're on to a loser? (If its internal then it will side with them).

 

If they offer me £4k I will take it. But if its the day before the hearing then I won't

 

 

I am going all the way now as its taken a lengthy 6 months (started proceedings in August).

 

Edit: I just read through this thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?289883-DG-Solicitors-Costs

 

Apparently this person didnt go through the small claims court and had to pay £1500 in DG costs. However, another poster said if they went through small claims then they wouldnt had to pay...?

[Durkin]

Hi Noddy,

 

Counsel are expensive lawyers who should know the law better than the ordinarys at DG. They'll advise DG that they're onto a loser but they may still gamble that they'll be able to either pull the wool over the judges eyes or buy themselves a decision.

 

In Edinburgh, HFC gambled in this manner and won. The judges considered that the bank had done nothing wrong at all! They didn't even bother addressing the appeal itself from me. The consumer, according to the muppets there must pay for goods they didn't ask for! Everyone in the court, including Counsel for the bank, knew the bank was in the wrong but the judgement still came in the banks favour. Suspicious.

 

The judgement does reiterate though the basic principal that £8K is reasonable (in the eyes of the law - which itself is an arse, often protecting the guilty) for general damages to creditworthiness following a wrongful default, whether you've been done for a few hours or a few decades.

 

If you're happy with £4K and they offer that much, you might consider taking it. Even if it's on the day of the hearing. Counsel can be quite intimidating and will try and put words in your mouth or use trick questions to try and damage your character, something the judge is likely to take into consideration. Nothing to worry about though with nerves of steel!

 

Just be honest and succinct.

 

Richard.

[Mike_hawk]

Part 27 for costs on the sct Nod........ plus a hell of a lot of if's, but's, maybe's and references to other rules http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part27#IDAKBTBB

 

 

Check CPR27.14(3) and you'll understand what I meant about responding to any offers.

[davem8383]

hi there noddy, ive just read your thread (only took 2 hours) im at the stage where you started your thread and just had my default removed. im keen to see what the outcome of your case is and wish you luck. hopefully you have a good outcome and ill use your case as reference lol. Its amazing how these big companies think its ok to tarnish your credit rating for no reason and then try to wriggle out of the consequences. ive been using a different case to keep my morale up, david vs goliath!!!!!

[noddy997]

@ Durkin, in the first trial you was awarded £8k, however in the appeal in 2010 was you asked to repay this back or was you stil eligible to it?

 

You said if they offer £4k on the day of the hearing, do you mean at the hearing or before the hearing takes place? I thought there needs to be 7 days notice to the court to cancel a trial and state that a settlement has reached?

 

 

@ Mike - law jargon confuses the living day lights out of me. I have read pargraph (3) and you are trying to imply that applies to me? However, I did not behave unreasonbly but instead t I counter offered them.

 

 

@ Daven - thank you. Was your default in the same circumstances as to mine? Also start your own thread as that way we can follow you, and guide you. And then if am successful in mine I could of course help you too.

 

 

Off topic - Its funny how HSBC "demand" overdrafts. I went in to Lloyds today to do business, and they asked me about my student/graduate account. I asked them do you have a "pay on demand" policy like HSBC for overdrafts, they said "no we dont, but you have to pay money in reguarly". Its funny how HSBC got ludicrous policies.

[Mike_hawk]

 

 

@ Mike - law jargon confuses the living day lights out of me. I have read pargraph (3) and you are trying to imply that applies to me? However, I did not behave unreasonbly but instead t I counter offered them.

 

 

Nod, I'm trying to give you the heads up as to the methodology used by counsel in pleading its clients case and why it (a) attempts to drag the case into the fast track and [when that fails] (b) presents ever increasing w/p offers in an attempt to present you to the court as a party that will not mediate.

 

Do you have a written record of your counter offer?

 

Its all about mitigating its clients costs and exposure to damage by placing pressure on the other side to fold.

 

You really have to get your head around the mind games the other side will play.

 

Are you confident of your position and understand all arguments should this go to trial and you sit opposite a smug barrister with 20 years experience in matters such as this?

 

Have you fully researched King, Wilson and Kpohraror so that you are fully prepared for trial?

 

If the answer is yes then you should do fine, if it's a no then I'd be making a proposal to compromise the case. Its only my opinion but I can't see that you have anything to prove by forcing this to a trial if there is another remedy, the case law already exists......... whilst a win would present itself as an additional first instance case on record it wouldn't add any weight to the previous findings.

[davem8383]

noddy, my default was in different circumstances as it was with a mobile phone company so they arent regulated in the same way etc... however they did not have my permission to share my details with cra,s they held and share incorrect info and did nothing to make me aware of the outstanding balance. also their SAR is massively incomplete. i could go on and on about the errors they have made but i dont want to hijack your thread. just wanted to wish you luck. its nice to see someone else going in the right direction.

 

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?378938-problems-with-mobile-phone-co-orange-(2-Viewing)-nbsp

[noddy997]

Mike I still dont understand you (the 1st paragraph). Maybe your English is advanced than mine and its possibly law related? lol (dont get me wrong I am a graduate).

 

Yes I do have a written record.

 

King, Wilson and Kpohraror - the latter was awarded £5500 in general damages, his cheque was refused by the bank. He appealed for £57,100 in loss to business but that was refused by the Judge

 

Wilson was made by bankrupt by his bank whilst away on military service (quiet similar to my case).

 

And King was the one where there was issues regarding machinery? (Was King a Scottish case? As within Durkin's it says "Sheriff" which only applies to Scotland).

 

Also, quiet important to realise here, Mike, DG are avoiding King, Wilson and Kpohraror in my correspondonce and are simply referring to Durkin stating that "his case is of Scottish law blah blah". They are deflecting the other cases.

 

I am going to trial because I cant reach a settlement figure as I have previously stated (if they had common sense they would budge up their offers in a reasonable manner - they are still on the £1000 mark and just reached halfway - I told them quite clearly I would take £4000). I am not going to trial simply because for the fun of it. I know it is going to be very hard but am not left with much choice.

[Mike_hawk]

Mike I still dont understand you (the 1st paragraph). Maybe your English is advanced than mine and its possibly law related? lol (dont get me wrong I am a graduate).

 

Yes I do have a written record.

 

King, Wilson and Kpohraror - the latter was awarded £5500 in general damages, his cheque was refused by the bank. He appealed for £57,100 in loss to business but that was refused by the Judge

 

Wilson was made by bankrupt by his bank whilst away on military service (quiet similar to my case).

 

And King was the one where there was issues regarding machinery? (Was King a Scottish case? As within Durkin's it says "Sheriff" which only applies to Scotland).

 

Also, quiet important to realise here, Mike, DG are avoiding King, Wilson and Kpohraror in my correspondonce and are simply referring to Durkin stating that "his case is of Scottish law blah blah". They are deflecting the other cases.

 

I am going to trial because I cant reach a settlement figure as I have previously stated (if they had common sense they would budge up their offers in a reasonable manner - they are still on the £1000 mark and just reached halfway - I told them quite clearly I would take £4000). I am not going to trial simply because for the fun of it. I know it is going to be very hard but am not left with much choice.

 

Nod, my English is the same as yours mate............ it's my own experience of the civil court regime which may slightly differ. Think of it more akin to a game, it doesn't have much of an option but to present itself as 'wronged' and making all attempts to mediate the matter. I've always played the game to my advantage and shown how 'reasonable' I can be in allowing the other side to settle on my terms.

 

Which case/s have you referred to in your particulars [original and amended], Richards or the others? Richards is only persuasive in England and Wales, Khopraror should really be cited in England. Did you include a reference to it within your particulars?

[noddy997]

Within my particulars (ammended only) I only referred to Durkin.

 

There is simply not enough room to mention a great deal within the particulars.

 

DG are making out Durkin's is persuasive in Scotland only ?

 

I am in England so Kophraor shouldnt be a problem.

 

What about King and Wilson, where are they based?

[Mike_hawk]

Durkin is relevant in the sheriffs court in Scotland, Richard will explain I'm sure........at this time it is persuasive only in England and Wales, it relies upon Kpohraror........ will the other side try to convince the dj of same? probably

 

Kpohraror is the effective case within your jurisdiction.......this should be your target as the more recent case and findings of same.

[noddy997]

What about King and Wilson??

 

Thanks for your support so far Mike. Still a month to go.

 

If anyone is free, or nearby they should come to the trial for current and future experience (I never had any) and for support as well!

[Mike_hawk]

[ATTACH]40909[/ATTACH]

 

Hi Nod

 

The attachment should assist, contains pretty much all the references you should need for trial.

[noddy997]

Thanks for that Mike. I have tried Googling some of the case law, some isn't picked up and some seems to be abroad. They seem mainly in favour of Kpohraror as they too are for cheques being disregarded by banks.

 

Am in the process of writing my side. Shall I state the background details first, or shall I state how I discovered the default?

[Mike_hawk]

Hi Nod

 

A little background is always a good thing, it helps the court consider the relationship of the parties prior to events leading up to the case.

 

Try post #762 of this thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?331427-Robinson-Way-lifting-a-stay-on-a-County-Court-claim-made-in-July-2009-Happy-Christmas!!/page39 for some ideas on construction of your w/s.

[noddy997]

Cheers Mike.

 

Those docs seem to be mostly of the defendants side rather than claimants.

 

So its ok to use first person then.

 

Also is my side called the witness statement? I thought w/s were from witnesses that may need to be relied on within trial. Surely it aint called w/s isit? I was thinking more of the terms of like, prosecution, but another word?

[Mike_hawk]

Hi Nod

 

You are your own witness to the events, so yep........... first person for content

[noddy997]

Hi guys, I went to court today to ask about how do I claim my expenses. The 2 clerks I seen said that its upto the Judge at the hearing to whether allow you to claim expenses or not - entirely their discretion.

 

Does anyone know if I have to fill out a form? That I could take along to the trial?

 

They didn't seem too helpful unfortunately.

[noddy997]

Guys, I have also bought a free credit report from Equifax again today. It shows my search history and Wescott did a "Trace Enquiry" on the 22/12/2011 (6months after the default was removed).

 

Does anyone know what a "Trace Enquiry" is? From the words am assuming its an enquiry conducted to trace someone?

 

I shall ring up Equifax tommorow to confirm this. If it is what I believe it is, and if DG get rowdy next month, I shall also use this on them as well.

 

Just a quick update:

 

My credit score as of today sits at 486 in the "Good" category (which starts from 474). Before it was 352 "Satisfactory" level (minimum score is 349) before this when with the default it was at 317 "Poor". "Excellent" level is at 900, so I got some good years to go!!

 

All my payments, mortgage, direct debits etc are in "Excellent" green and for past 12+ months each month is ticked in green which means payments made on time promptly.

 

I shall also use this for my bit next month to say I am a very creditworthy person for my age incase DG try to play dirty.

 

 

I also noticed the HSBC account has disappeared from my file. HSBC might have asked them to ? I shall ask Equifax this as well. They have left the "Credit Card from Hsbc Plc (Card Services)" on their though which is "Settled". I think without the "Settled" I would have a higher rating. The current account was "Settled" on my previous credit files!!

Edited January 30, 2013 by noddy997

[Durkin]

@ Durkin, in the first trial you was awarded £8k, however in the appeal in 2010 was you asked to repay this back or was you stil eligible to it?

 

You said if they offer £4k on the day of the hearing, do you mean at the hearing or before the hearing takes place? I thought there needs to be 7 days notice to the court to cancel a trial and state that a settlement has reached?

 

 

Hi Noddy,

 

In 2010, I still hadn't been paid, so there was nothing to pay back.

 

In any case, the appeal is ongoing in the Supreme Court. Once the Supreme Court sorts everything out, I should finally be awarded reparation, including £8K + interest.

 

The Court of Session, astonishingly, ruled that the bank hadn't done anything wrong. They did confirm though, that £8K is an "appropriate" award of damages just for general damage to creditwothiness.

 

The Court of Session judgements have weight in English courts. Obviously, once the Supreme Court finish the job, it'll be cast in stone. I hope, they'll do a good job by distinguishing between a day and 6 years!

 

I've heard about situations where deals have been done at the court on the day of the hearing.

[noddy997]

Oh so you didnt get the £8k??! Oops! Hope that cant be used against me could it?

[noddy997]

I am just doing more reading and going through the Directions again, I got a hearing next month not a trial. And apparently a trial is the final hurdle i.e. the decision of the Judge.

 

I didnt know this before!

 

Anyone got / had experience of this? And how soon after can I have a trial?

[Durkin]

Oh so you didnt get the £8k??! Oops! Hope that cant be used against me could it?

 

I don't have the £8K yet.....

 

It was awarded in Aberdeen and the Appeal Court confirmed that anyone in your situation should receive damages just for general damage to creditworthiness.

 

The Appeal Court (Court of Session - Scotland's highest court) failed to deliver justice in my case under extremely suspicious circumstances.

 

The Supreme Court should reaffirm and hopefully improve damages awarded for general damage to creditworthiness.

 

All this is in your favour and should be relied upon.

 

Only darker forces will prevent you being awarded £5K. Let's hope that English judges are made of sterner stuff. I'm sure they are. At least some of them.

 

Cheers,

 

Richard.