HSBC v Pipster - Court Tomorrow!! *****Discontinued*****

[Pipster2797]

How does this look

 

 

Draft Order for Directions

 

 

 

 

The Claimant shall within 14 days of service of this order file and serve the following:

• Copies of the executed Credit Agreement and any documents referred to within it which complies with the consumer Credit Act 1974 and all subsequent regulations, which the claimant seeks to rely upon

• Default Notice compliant with s87 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) as amended,

• Copies of all statement’s or other document relied upon

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

 

 

The Defendant shall within 14 days thereafter file and serve the following

• An amended defence sufficiently particularised in response to the documents supplied by the claimant

 

 

Only thing is they have already admitted they don't have the CCA or should I say they state they are unable to locate it at the moment.

[DonkeyB]

Put them to strict proof, as you have done. Just have a couple of copies of that handy for the judge.

 

We all know that the recon issues in Carey v HSBC were about satisfying s 78 requests and not about enforcement, but many judges are fooled by smart and smarmy lawyers. A recon, strictly speaking, is insufficient to enforce. There’s a bit of judge lottery involved, but you must insist on getting the point over to the judge – you can then ask him why he thinks a recon is OK for enforcement.

[Pipster2797]

Thanks DonkeyB for all the advice today.

 

I suppose the best I can hope for is he judge down their application for the stay to be lifted and a SJ. Orders that the docs are to be produced within 14 days and then wait for he docs that they can't produce.

[DonkeyB]

I think any judge will be impressed by your preparedness and your attempts to reach the overriding objective. Let’s hope you don’t get a curmudgeon with a headache whose wife has just put diesel in their petrol car.

[DonkeyB]

Try another call... are you recording them? Keep a log for the judge in case their WS turns up late.

[Pipster2797]

ha ha lets hope his wife hasn't done so.

 

I will try again now

[Pipster2797]

Well just spoke to them now.

 

Firstly they have now got my WS which they got on the 2nd Dec. I corrected her and said I had proof it was signed on the 1st Dec. Even so the letter I got today that states that they haven'g got my WS is dated 5th? She tried to explain that the letter was written a few days before but it goes through their systems. So I said well it should be dated the day you write it. She cut me short to say she isn't obliged to send a WS but she has done today, which I should get tomorrow and its basically a reply of mine going over everything else that has been said so far.

 

She also tried to get me to back down by referring to the Carey case and basically trying to point out I don't stand a chance of winning. I made my point again as per the WS and then said let the judge decide tomorrow and left it at that.

[DonkeyB]

So they had no intention of sending you the WS? And they didn’t have to? Crap! It should have been submitted with the application! That’s how it works!

 

You must complain loudly tomorrow and point out to the judge that they have UNFAIRLY waited to receive your WS to respond to it.

 

Did you record the call?

 

This is what I meant when I suggested you should expect dirty tricks from these shysters. The deliberately wrong dating of their letter is absolute proof of this.

 

Must try and get a skelly in order then. They may well introduce new documents in their WS that you have never seen.

[kurvaface]

That's why you need to keep envelopes..for post marks.

[Pipster2797]

with regards to the wrong dating of the letter, Im going to explain this to the judge tomorrow.

 

Hearing is at 3pm so doesn't give me much time to get a skeleton argument put together tomorrow, however again I will make sure the judge is aware of this too.

 

Regardless of the lottery judge, how can they get away with sending docs with the WS etc? It's something that should be done from the outset. It's shocking

[Pipster2797]

sorry forgot to say i didn't record the call because i cant.

 

I do keep envelopes for what they have sent me through. That isn't the issue though. They say they got my witness statement on the 2nd Dec, she confirmed that on the phone but the letter she sent out dated the 5th Dec and I got today says they haven't got my WS. When I questioned her about the dates she admitted the letter was written a few days in advance because it has to go through their internal systems to be sent out!!

[Pipster2797]

dup posting

[DonkeyB]

We are reputable firm of solicitors. We would never lie or twist the facts, your honour. Honest, guv.

[DonkeyB]

By the way, this posting won’t appear till Friday, as it has to go through a few systems to get out. Not. I suppose their client sends their DNs out the same way?

[Pipster2797]

exactly what I was just thinking and what's the odds I don't get it until I turn up at court. With no time to prepare for it.

[DonkeyB]

In which case you refer the judge to what you have said here re unfairness and prejudice, and demand an adjournment with costs to you.

[citizenB]

Pipster, did they say on the SJ application form that they would be relying on a Witness statement or.. did they say they would be relying on what you posted earlier ? If they said they would be relying on a WS, I think it should have been attached to the SJ Application !

[DonkeyB]

Covered that in post #38 CB – pipster hasn’t elaborated yet.

 

Were they not able to email the statement? How come she can get a WS in the post tonight when a letter takes three days to post? Clever legal rep! Contradicts herself at every turn.

[Pipster2797]

Pipster, did they say on the SJ application form that they would be relying on a Witness statement or.. did they say they would be relying on what you posted earlier ? If they said they would be relying on a WS, I think it should have been attached to the SJ Application !

 

no there was no mention of a WS on their application for SJ.

 

So take it they don't need a WS then? So why then reply with one?

[Pipster2797]

getting a bit confused if they need a WS or not

[DonkeyB]

They have not followed procedure, so you must object to them presenting a WS at the hearing without first disclosing it. Especially as you are an LiP. That rep deliberately misled you as to the true legal position. That is a big no-no according to SRA rules.

 

Wouldn’t surprise me is the rep was fibbing and there is no WS.

[Pipster2797]

They have not followed procedure, so you must object to them presenting a WS at the hearing without first disclosing it. Especially as you are an LiP. That rep deliberately misled you as to the true legal position. That is a big no-no according to SRA rules.

 

Wouldn’t surprise me is the rep was fibbing and there is no WS.

 

All she said was she wasn't obiliged to send a WS but out of courtesy she had because I had sent one and was replying.

[citizenB]

Wishing you all the best tomorrow

[Pipster2797]

Wishing you all the best tomorrow

 

Thanks CB

 

DonkeyB thanks for the info on Phoenix v Kotecha. Having a good read of pt's thread and seems very relevant to my case and the fact it was from the court of appeal from which I understand is a higher court than county I'm at tomorrow and even the high court. Going to read all 17 pages tonight

[Pipster2797]

Morning Everyone! Just waiting for the postman who normally comes around 10:30.

 

DonkeyB I've been thinking allot about what you said yesterday regarding what I say and denying I owe this debt. Also after reading the Pheonix case I think the truth may be best in that:

 

-Around April 2008 I contacted HSBC and set up an arrangement to pay a reduced monthly fee, which was agreed. This continued on to around October 2008. This was because my job was on the line and things like overtime and the excellent bonuses I was on came to an end. I was made redundant in Oct 2008.

-In October 2008, I found out they had defaulted me via my credit file. They had never told me, no letter or anything.

-October 2008, I requested firstly my CCA but never got a reply. Reason being I wanted to see if I had any PPI on it aswell as check what rate I was paying etc. Basically looking at all options I had to help me pay off my debts. What I could do to move debt around at lower fees etc.

-Following on from my first request I requested my CCA several more times with no reply.

- In Feb 2009. I sent a SAR off to not just get my CCA but also to see what PPI and charges I had been charged and try and reclaim everything. My CCA still didn't appear and I continued to quest this right up to Oct 2009 explaining incomplete information was sent in my SAR. I left it at that and never heard anything back from HSBC

- May 2010. POC received again with no CCA, so sent off CPR request. Never got anything back. Embrassed defence put in and case stayed.

- Dec 2010. Pack came through the post. Recon CCA, no default and part statements, wrote back to say they again they were missing,

- June 2011. Court letter to say they had applied for stay to be lifted and SJ. Again wrote back asking for info etc and even asked the court to make them send the info, which they replied I would have to pay a fee of £40 for documents to released.even though I had requested them all in a SAR. They wrote back said they never got a SAR

- Date set for SJ hearing today.

- Filed my witness statement last week along with a without predj letter for withdrawing case and they had received SAR and I had evidence of this via recorded delivery, replies from HSBC, making me collect it through the branch etc.

- Letter yesterday to say that their mistake they had complied with the SAR and they finally admit they aren't able to locate CCA and are using a recon.

 

So that is the truth and now reading back I should of had all of this in the WS but I was worried about sticking to the points etc and not waffling on of reasons why I fell behind etc.