Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Honestly you are all amazing on this site, thank you so much for your help and time. ill keep an eye out and only return when i receive a claim letter for sure also, i updated my address with amex and tsb before i even missed payments. the initial address was my family home but i dont reside there. to avoid a bombardment of letters there i have now updated my address, will they send all threats etc to the new address? Or old address?   do you reccomend i send both tsb and amex my update in address via a letter?
    • Your point 4 deals with that and puts them to strict proof .....but realistically they are not in a position to state that within their particulars they were not the creditor at the time of default but naturally assume the OC would have...so always worth challenging and if you get a DJ who knows his onions on the day may ask for further evidence from the OC internal accounts system. 
    • I see, shame, I think if a claim is 'someone was served' then proof of that should be mandatory. Appreciate your input into the WS whenever you get chance, thanks in advance
    • Paper trail off the original creditor often confirms the default and issue of a notice...not having or being able to disclose the actual copy or being able to produce a copy less so. Creditors are not compelled to keep copies of the actual default notice so you will in most cases get a reconstituted version but must contain accurate figures/dates/format.     .    
    • Including Default Notice Andy? Ok, I think this is the best I can do.. it all makes sense with references to their WS. They have included exhibits that dates don't match the WS about them, small but still.. if you're going to reference letters giving dates, then the exhibits should be correct, no? I know I redacted them too much, but one of the dates differs to the WS by a few months. IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim. 1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 24/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
  • 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

Help needed with HFC claim please


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3480 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 183
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Try emailing Roger Lovering CEO HFC Bank [email protected] you should get an email back within a few hours then a phone call a couple of days later I did . Worth a try just tell them your not happy with part of the offer

davsib

Edited by davsib

HFC go get them:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good idea davsib.

 

I think I will send a letter with my acceptance form giving them one last chance to make me an offer.

 

Theyve admitted that both loans contain PPI,

the only reason that they've not upheld them is because they say they have no proof that we didn't cancel the PPI or the amount that was paid.

 

Well they had no proof with any of the others either,

only that all the loans were in a chain and each one paid off the previous one.

 

If they haven't got any idea of the amounts that were paid they must have some idea and could make an offer still.

 

If they still refuse I'll send an email to the CEO.

 

It's worth a try before I involve the FOS.

 

I've got the time now that we'll have £18,000!

 

Beware Direct Auto Finance, it will be you next.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

you also need to point out they are the ONLY creditor

we on CAG have ever seen that MAKE punter prove they actually did pay it!

 

p'haps they shouldn't have shredded so much 'evidence' when the ppi scandal broke

 

just so they could bury their multi £M fleecing of 100,000's of customers in the 80's & 90's

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

If you post it, it will scanned and sent to their office in India, I was told this by the person who sorted mine out.

If you use the email it will be delt with in the UK.

HFC go get them:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you post it, it will scanned and sent to their office in India, I was told this by the person who sorted mine out.

If you use the email it will be delt with in the UK.

Really? Why on earth do they send it to India? Is that for all the claims, or just the ones that you are querying? I don't need to attach anything to the email do I, just reference the claim number and their comments on the offer letter?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? Why on earth do they send it to India? Is that for all the claims, or just the ones that you are querying? I don't need to attach anything to the email do I, just reference the claim number and their comments on the offer letter?

 

Because it's cheaper, I just quoted claim numbers ect and said I was sick of being messed around

HFC go get them:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because it's cheaper, I just quoted claim numbers ect and said I was sick of being messed around

Ok, I'll do that then. They messed me around so much with the SAR that they gave me my £10 back! They know that both those loans were paid off, because they were paid by other loans in the chain. Even for the other loans they said that they had no information other than what I sent them, but they didn't ask for statements for those! It will cost them enough for those to be referred to the FOS, so they might as well sort it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got an email from the FOS this morning to say that they have received my complaint and they will be in touch shortly, when they have had a chance to look through the information we sent, to let us know what happens next. So now we wait.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously the email was looked at as I received this today. It's laughable really, as they are only not upholding the last 2 loans as they say they do not have enough information to calculate a refund! What do you reckon the FOS can do? Can they make them make me an offer or are they going to string this out?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The wording of the letter seems more appropriate for a credit card account than a loan - however I have re-read the thread and they clearly are loan accounts. My view would be that HFC have had enough time and to get these in the queue for FOS with a request that HFC be made to make a reasonable offer based on assumptions.

 

My own view is that FOS will make them make some kind of offer as they have accepted that the PPI was mis-sold, the downside is that FOS appear to be trying to manage their backlog by prioritising easy PPI cases - they are quoting 12-18 months for a case and my own experience is that anything where there is an offer on a case (even if your complaint to them is about associated loans without an offer) gets put in the cupboard marked tricky - so you are looking towards the top end or beyond of that timescale.

 

Based upon the age of the account and the limited info - my own view is that you would struggle with the court route - although as always I need to make clear, there are far more experienced people on the site particularly on the legal side who will be able to better assist with that potential route

Edited by Andybars
Link to post
Share on other sites

No I don't have any old statements at all. The 2 loans are from 1995 and 1997. It's already in the hands of the FOS and I just e mailed this letter to them to go with the other documents in my case file. I don't know why they won't just go with the info that they have, it would save so much time, but they seem determined to dig their heels in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to work out the first loan but I'm struggling. It's obviously not one that has upfront PPI on it and works more like a credit card.

 

They say in their letter that the payment is 3% of the balance and that the PPI is 0.6% of the balance.The loan was for £7528.30 and I am assuming a rate of 25.4%.

 

We signed it at the end of January 1995 so I'm not sure if the first payment would be in February or March.

 

The amount of £7338.21 was outstanding when we took out another loan that started in March 1996. How do I go about starting to work out what our payments were? Does the interest on this loan go up until today, or the end of the loan? Is the interest added onto the balance each month or at the beginning? I'm confused.

Edited by ukdarrenfan
Link to post
Share on other sites

the current account plus worked like a credit card, int was monthly on the bal

outstanding at the end of each month.

though sometimes, like me, I paid affixed sum each month through choice.

 

ims21 has a thread on one as do I somewhere

daveib also has one.

 

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

I can't imagine that we would have paid more than the minimum payment each month and I don't think we borrowed more on it or we wouldn't have taken out another loan after a year. I honestly don't understand how it worked. Will they be able to make an offer based on that information with no statements?

Link to post
Share on other sites

no HFC wont

 

the only bank that requires statements to prove what you paid

 

we are working on this very unfair stance

 

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

it would be nice if they did

 

I don't think the FOS has ruled infavour of any CAP HFC ones

 

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

same with me

 

FOS refused

 

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

there is nowt to say the approach we have taken is not correct

we have used an avg of the known ppi payments for both the CAP ones.

 

what about your banks statements?

or did you pay [as I did & was told to at the branch only] by card and a little white record card?

 

I can se what hfc are getting at in post 143 and that recent letter

they don't know what you had outstanding month to month

 

BUT , if you refinanced for £XXXX then its a good bet the bal was the same throughout

mine was!!

 

dx

 

I think things are getting a little confused here. I don't have bank statements and my loans aren't stamped as paid in full. This is someone else posting in the thread and not me.

 

 

I already proved to HFC that my loans all paid off each other, so it's not proof of that that they want.Our loans would have been paid by direct debit, I certainly don't recall having to pay in the branch because it would have been really inconvenient as it wasn't close by.

 

 

I can't understand why we had a mix of normal loans with these 2 in the middle. HFC know the amount of the loan, the APR, the percentage of the loan which made up the payment, the percentage which made up the PPI and the amount that was refinanced after a year. They have more than enough information to make an educated guess at how much we paid.

 

Unfortunately they are now insisting on statements to prove the exact amount we paid each month for both of these loans and say that they will only pay out what we can prove we paid...because they know we can't prove it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

post moved to a new thread as tink does not have one

 

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

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...