Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi all,        I really need to start my own thread on this Claim with Overdales/Lowell for a Cap One debt. but have already got to this stage .. My initial question for the moment - until replies come in - is that I figure my main stance is that a purchased debt cannot be claimed, debts can only be claimed by the original issuer of the debt .. but mediation is about coming to an agreement. So would I be acting in bad faith if I enter into mediation yet not seeking to come to a financial agreement? Also, I need to reject the scheduled time slot and ask for another as I'm not going to be free during those hours. The wording of the email gives the impression that I am given this one slot and if I reject it, then I am rejecting mediation - there is no mention of rescheduling, only of freeing up the slot for others .. although, I would have thought it would say so, if there were no possibility to reschedule.. Can I ask for another date without issue?   Anyway, if it's more helpful, I am happy to post up my defence and start a proper thread? I had a lot on at the time and had to do things right away due to the time limits, so didn't feel I had time to come here and go back and forth for info, so put my defence together from reading through relevant threads, late at night. CCA request appears to have been fulfilled (I'm still to check the accuracy of the documents). The other thing, asking solicitors about the particulars of the claim, hasn't .. although I forgot to ask for proof of postage and didn't send recorded post either (whereas the CCA I did), so not sure if I can pursue that easily ..?  
    • There is a plea guilty website...   Screenshot 2024-05-22 144200.pdf
    • Looking for a bit of assistance. I moved into a rented flat on 20th April 2024. I viewed it on the 14th April. Before I moved into the flat, the letting agency provided me with an offer sheet, in said offer sheet I made a number of requests and conditions related to me progressing with assuming the tenancy. These were: 1. A professional clean of the flat prior to move in date. 2. The hob, shower glass and bathroom cabinet be replaced prior to move in date. These were all planned actions by the landlord when I viewed it. I could see the boxes for the hob and other items in the flat. I prepared to move in on the 20th April but none of the work mentioned in the offer sheet had been completed. The standard of the clean was abysmal - mouldy food left in the fridge, nothing wiped down, bathroom mouldy etc. The hob, shower glass and bathroom cabinet were also not installed. I decided to not officially move into the flat as it was not in a condition as promised, my partner lives relatively close by so I lived with her initially. It was only on the 24th April that the hob, shower glass and bathroom cabinet were installed. The cleaners visited again 2 weeks after move in date (3rd April) and attempted another clean of the flat. Again, it was a poor job. I resorted to cleaning the flat myself. I have numerous pictures of the things I identified during my clean and have sent this all to the letting agency. Because of the issues faced, I asked the letting agency that the rent be reduced for the initial month. Exactly halved - to represent the 2 weeks that I was not living at the property. The landlord and letting agency have responded by saying that they will be willing to accept 1 weeks rent as a deduction but not 2. My question is, am I in a strong position to insist on the 2 weeks rent returned or have I been fortunate that they have even offered a weeks rent as a deduction? I would like to insist on the 2 weeks. I have paid the 2 weeks only as my rent collection date passed 2 days ago. Thank you for any assistance. Any further relevant details required let me know and I will provide.
  • 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
      • 161 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

HFC Account Numbers


big fish
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4083 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

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

still wont prove PPI

 

which ofcourse we know was forced upon us.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BigFish, I'm curently in the exact same place as you, regarding information on loans and PPI that are over 6 years old! I found that there is an email address for the CEO of HSBC/HFC that is actually monitored, its: [email protected]

  • Confused 1

Many of life’s failures are experienced by people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up. - Thomas Edison

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

No rely from CEO as yet!!

 

Heres an amusing/or not quote from HFC Website

 

"HFC Bank also places great emphasis on environmental care and this is reflected in the number of environmental awards the Bank has won. The Bank makes every effort to recycle its paper, as well as use recycled paper wherever possible."

 

To think when they eventually respond to complaints the letters could possibly be made from reconstituted agreements with lots of pre ticks!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Reply from letter to CEO yesterday!

 

Can you believe HFC have turned up three agreements!!!

 

  1. Personal Loan Plus Feb 99 - no PPI, not visible on shoddy copy anyway!
  2. Personal Loan Plus Oct 02 - PPI pre crossed in credit protection & accidental sickness and unemployment insurance
  3. Personal Loan Plus Oct 03 - no PPI

They have asked that I phone them for settlement on account 2. I have bank statements of payments that at one point reached £76 a month, credit limit was £2500 according to credit report but may have been more (states £2000 on agreement but states it may vary). It also included paying off another agreement at the time of inception £307.53. Will post HFC reply when I get time also all figures relating to account 2 for advice.

 

Dealing with HFC is akin to going fishing

 

A lot of patience is required in order to catch a big fish

 

Lets see if I can land it and possibly catch some more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Regards Big Fish

Edited by big fish
Correction
Link to post
Share on other sites

well well well

 

no we have no info...

 

then it appears!!

 

i wonder what the FOS or the ICO will have to sat about this.

 

blatantly told you atleast twice?? nothing existed.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

un-app'd them for now

 

you need to sanitise then a bit more

 

too many bits of of unique data showing [fax times parts of accounts numbers etc.]

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

tell them how annoyed you are that they did not send these on day one.

 

proves everything we've [i've]!] always said.

 

what the hell did they fine them for to allow then to carry on treating customers like this!! a joke

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my reply from the letter marked strictly private & confidential FAO CEO HFC Bank.

 

Can anyone identify any of my questions/concerns that have been answered or clarified... I'm struggling!!

 

The accounts are over six years... no data... destroyed... P.S. we slipped in three agreements that our staff have tediously reconstructed since the onset of your complaint!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are details of payments on account with PPI

 

Info below is all that is available. Details show on 2007 credit file No total amount borrowed.

 

Personal Loan Plus

 

Duration - 10/10/02 – 12/03/04 Credit Limit £2500

Account started with a balance of £307.53 from another agreement

 

Payments I have documentation to prove I payed below

 

04/11/02 DD £36.46

 

05/12/02 DD £56.90

 

06/01/03 DD £60.40

 

04/02/03 DD £60.31

 

07/03/03 DD £75.37

 

04/04/03 DD £74.58

 

06/05/03 DD £73.94

 

04/06/03 DD £76.56

 

07/07/03 DD £75.91

 

04/08/03 DD £75.21

 

04/09/03 DD £74.57

 

06/10/03 DD £76.33

 

04/11/03 DD £76.59

 

05/12/03 DD £75.93

 

05/01/04 DD £75.23

 

04/02/04 DD £74.59

 

08/03/04 DD £74.35

 

Any advice re the amount of redress I can expect before I contact HFC would be appreciated. PM if you wish.

 

Big Fish

Edited by big fish
more info
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Personal Loan Plus product was/is a revolving credit account where the PPI was based as a percentage of the outstanding balance from month to month.

 

From the list of payments you made to the account you will not be able to work out what the PPI charges were.

 

You are under no obligation to deal with this chap on the phone and they should make you an offer in writing. In which case I would be writing to him again and tell him so.

 

You will have to take a view on any figure that results from this complaint since HFC seem to be digging in.

 

I would, however, be putting a case together for fos anyway for the way you have been treated.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ims

 

Monthly payments were 1/30th of the outstanding balance each month according to info from CAG member Scoobydoo (see below). Direct debits would have been minimum payments I would have thought. Is it then posible to roughly figure PPI?

 

CAP - Current Account Plus - a current account with overdraft facility. It had a cheque book and £50 guarantee card, plus a separate ATM card. The overdraft required you to pay at least 1/30th of the balance. Also, Stockport branch number was 074 (I think), so the account number would start with either 74 or 074. This rule only applied to current accounts.

 

PL - a fixed term, fixed rate personal loan from the branch. Same payment each month, every month until the end of the term.

 

PLP - a "Personal Loan Plus". This was a revolving credit agreement with a credit limit, much like a credit card but without the plastic. Instead you had a cheque book, but no guarantee card. The payments on this were also 1/30th of the balance, so varied each month. The "Budget Revolving Account" on your credit file could be a CAP or PLP.

 

HOL - Homeowner Loan - similar to a PL, but secured on property and with a variable interest rate (and much longer terms available).

 

HAP - Homeowner Account Plus - similar to a PLP and again secured on property. This had much greater credit limits, but I forget the repayment terms (not many were sold compared to other products).

 

The above were all branch sold accounts. HFC also provided consumer finance through the like to Dixons and PC World. These "retail" accounts are likely to be the Credit Sale Fixed Term account listed in your post. Different retailers offered different terms. Some were pure interest free (0% APR), others were Interest Free Option and Deferred Interest Free Option accounts, meaning if you settled during the option period (usually 6, 9 or 12 months) you paid no interest. If you didn't settle, interest would be charged back to day one and for the rest of the term. The difference between IFO and DIFO is that the former required you to make payments during the option period, the latter didn't.

 

Big Fish

Edited by big fish
Link to post
Share on other sites

Monthly payments were 1/30th of the outstanding balance each month according to info from CAG member Scoobydoo (see below). Direct debits would have been minimum payments I would have thought. Is it then poosibble to roughly figure PPI?

 

Only you will know whether you paid just the minimum each month.

 

If you are sure you only paid the absolute minimum each you might be able to take a stab at the premiums but that's all it will be. You won't be able to calculate the interest charged or the 8%.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...