Bong v HSBC *Contractual Interest & 13yr claim**WON!!!**

[Guest bong]

Hiya lattie,

 

Well then there is this thread here which is a successful claim for interest on the manged loan : http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/16862-husband-hsbc-paid.html#post131690

 

What I said to pete, in a PM, was that I understand this to mean the following:

 

Say for instance the managed loan consisted of old overdraft of £2000, bit of spending money £500, and credit card balance £1500. Total £4,000. Managed loan taken out on say 25 June 2005. What I would do is using the spreadsheet you made to reclaim your bank charges, find out what the unlawful charges and overdraft interest on the unlawful charges totalled at 25 June 2005. Say it totalled £2,000. That means half of the managed loan was taken out to pay unlawful bank charges and interest, and it follows that half of the interest on the managed loan is reclaimable.

So you will need to find out what percentage of the managed loan related to unlawful charges and interest and apply that percentage to the ML interest.

 

I would also then apply contractual interest to the monies being reclaimed, or statutory interest when it goes to court.

 

At the moment I'm still thinking about what would happen with future interest on the ML. These are my thoughts - if they have refunded the offending penalty charges, and you could technically use this money to pay off that part of the ML, then you are in a poisition to mitigate your loss as it were and reduce the interest that is accruing. I think therefore that if you don't use the money in this way, maybe you would not be entitled to future interest rebates. Perhaps, looking at it this way, the claim for interest on the ML would only relate to interest charges in the period from when the ML was taken out to the date your current account charges were refunded? However your claim for interest on top would carry on until the claim was settled.

 

I hope this helps and hasn't confused you

[lateralus]

guess what! i actually understood that. you are a star! and i will tip my hat (and the scales). i don't know what he will say when i talk to him about it - he used 2k of the 2280 he got refunded on the current acct. to reduce the m.l. so i know it is bugging him (but also embarrassed to be there in the first place, no matter how much i've told him he is a little fish in a very big sea), so, thankx for that. i will munch on it and see what he wants to do. if he decides to go with it - i look forward to another challenge and will let you know if we do.

thankx again, ms bong!

[Guest bong]

I wish you luck and will help if I can

[lateralus]

just one more thought - before i get too excited. here's the quote from the acceptance letter he signed on the current account.

"I accept the sum of £xxx.xx in full and final settlement of my claim against HSBC. I agree to keep the fact of my claim and HSBC's ex gratia payment stricly confidential."

you'll see where i'm going with this - would this preclude us claiming for the interest on the ml as it's covering those charges - should this have been done all together (like husband's thread) or can it be done now? i would think it's ok but want your thoughts. thankx

[Guest bong]

My thoughts are that his acceptance was only in relation to what was included in that claim document. This is a new claim in respect of previously undisputed interest charges.

 

If they try to fight it you can use the fact that they've already settled a similar claim (husband's) against them.

[lateralus]

thank you!

[bill-k]

thank you!

Yes - thank you both. I was "earwigging" on that one, and may find that a useful one at some point in the future.

 

PS - they finally let me give you a clickeroonie, too, Bong.

[Guest bong]

now that can only mean one thing Bill - com'on where you been? who with? have you been offering free bananas around again?

 

Thank you both for blobbing me:D

[bill-k]

now that can only mean one thing Bill - com'on where you been? who with? have you been offering free bananas around again?

 

Thank you both for blobbing me:D

A gentleman never discloses...

A gorilla just gets on with the job...someone has to do it.

Too much information again - giving myself away willy-nilly, or should I say bananarama ?

 

Aaaw, heck !!!

[lateralus]

and now she has four i see! well deserved in my book - you still get my vote for site helper or mod! have a good friday, bong. if passed fridays are anything to go by - there just may be some happy offers in the post today for our little impatient fledglings!

[bill-k]

Is that right, Lateralus - has she just been blobbed up to four ?

 

Well, congrats Bong - you not only became a black belt in origami this week, but a four-blob bank-basher, now, too !!! I'm damn glad you're a mate - not an enemy.

 

Hope it's as good a Friday for you, too, Lattie !!

[Matheos95]

Hi Bong

 

Just wondered if you had heard anything else as we are both running similar time lines - natwest filed acknowledgement on the last possible day grrr and now there defence is due this Friday and not heard a thing - just wondered if your defence had come through yet, will be interesting to compare defences as same POC's used on N1's.

[Guest bong]

Nothing to report

 

they've got until 20th (a week tomorrow) for their defence and HSBC solicitors are slowing up now with the responses. yes it will be very interesting to compare defences won't it:D I'm subscribed to your thread so I'll pop along there when you update with any news.

 

everything crossed for us both

[Guest bong]

DEFENCE RECEIVED THIS MORNING FROM THE LOVELY DEBS

 

All standard stuff which makes it interesting seeing as my claim wasn't standard stuff .

 

1. the claiman'ts account is governed by the defendant's personal and/or business banking terms and conditions. (don't they know which?)

 

2. pursuant to the defendants terms and conditions the defendant is entitled to make a charge for its services as set out in the defendants price list, including an overdraft review fee for considering whether to provide and providing an overdraft.

 

3. the defendant denies that the charges applied to the claimants account amount to penalties at common law and/or unfair contract terms for the purposes of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (UTCCRs).

 

4. the charges applied to the claimants account are reasonable and are properly and fully disclosed in the defendants terms and conditions and published price list. the charges represent the contractually agreed price for the services provided and the UTCCRs are not applicable to them (but DG I haven't used them!); alternatively, they are not unfair contrary to the UTCCRs. Further, the charges are not default charges and accordingly cannot amount to a penalty.

 

5. save as set out above, each and every allegation made by the claimant is denied. for the reasons set out above, it is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. (looks like I'll be crossing me legs then:D )

 

statement of truth...

 

 

 

AQs to be in by 29 December.

 

 

oh what fun

[Matheos95]

Wow I expected something much different than that lol hehehehe with all the amount of cases they have in at the moment maybe they didnt notice the dates LOL well here is hoping - nothing in the post for me this morning only 2 more posty runs to go

[bill-k]

oh what fun

...it is to be on a one-horse open sleigh !!

 

Sure looks to me like they're sending out defences as templates, like sod-offs. They know they've lost, and are just knee-jerking, it seems to me, Bong.

 

Oh, thanks for the clickie - you're most kind. I won't ask where you've been though! Oh - special thanks in fact - it "blobbed" me up, too !!!

[Guest bong]

do you know what I've discovered?

 

this isn't their standard defence. I've just looked at all the hsbc defences that've been posted up in the forum and they've really excelled themselves with this one. i've got an extra 2 paras that no-one else has got! na-na- na-na-na! shame they haven't made the usual boo-boo of saying "...price for a service provided by the claimant.":p

[Matheos95]

lol woohoo see your a special case and highly priviledged someone had to copy and paste a whole 2 para's to yours - that was a hard days work for someone lol

[babsp2000]

LOL @ Bong! We always knew you were special!

[bill-k]

Bong - or anybody here, I'm trying to get someone to look at Tanz'z thread here. I can't help much there as it's not my field (so far), Claiming charges + Default removal. Can anyone take a peek - it's a simple query, I think :-

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/51318-tanzarelli-capital-one.html?nojs=1#goto_threadtools

[Guest bong]

hi Bill - I've had a look but defaults aren't my field either. There is a sub-forum in the legalities forum for default issues, thats all I can suggest.

[bill-k]

hi Bill - I've had a look but defaults aren't my field either. There is a sub-forum in the legalities forum for default issues, thats all I can suggest.

Thanks, Bong - wasn't sure. Sarahpp's posted a link there.

[OCTAF1SH]

Hello again!

 

wow, nice particulars!! (damn, foot in it again!)

 

I take it sections 9+10 are there just because your claim goes beyond 6yrs?

 

may i pillage a few bits of wording and arrangement please?! will add to my existing draft

 

wil.

[Guest bong]

Hello again!

 

wow, nice particulars!! (damn, foot in it again!)

 

well thank you:p

 

 

I take it sections 9+10 are there just because your claim goes beyond 6yrs?

 

you're right there

 

may i pillage a few bits of wording and arrangement please?! will add to my existing draft

 

wil.

 

you may

[mcuth]

Hey Bong!

 

Finally got my RBoS big contractual interest & 6+ year claim underway today - see here. Your PoC were most useful, thanks - think I already clicked you for them though, cos it won't let me do it again

 

Cheers

 

Michael