Me vs HSBC (Outrageous bank error - destroyed my credit rating for 7 years, in error, offered £100, then a £1000)

[picton]

Hello all,

 

This is my first post here,

I have been reading through several threads and am delighted to see the overwhelming support and guidance this forum offers,

I would be truly grateful if some of you would take the time to help me with my situation.

 

I was a victim of identity theft in 2006,

this is not disputed by either HSBC, the police or myself.

 

I've never had a credit card,

yet in 2006 someone was able to take one out in my name, with my own bank (HSBC).

 

I was called by HSBC in 2006,

they asked me to pay off the debt owed on "my" credit card,

I told them I've never had a credit card,

they said they think it is identity theft / fraud,

 

the police gave a crime reference number

and I was assured by HSBC that I would not have to pay a penny of the amount owed

and that it would not effect my credit rating in anyway.

 

All of this took place within a matter of days and all on the telephone.

 

HSBC apologised for the situation and reassured me that I had nothing to worry about.

I stupidly trusted them and thought nothing of it.

 

Fast forward a few years - 2009.

I was consistently being turned down for credit in every shape you could imagine.

I couldn't get simple things like a mobile phone, laptop, car, tools for work, credit cards,

any form of credit I was denied.

I didn't understand,

 

I'd never really borrowed money before (only student overdraft),

my friends were able to get mobile phones and some of them didn't even have a job!

 

I was working in a business development role at the time and could more than afford the credit I was requesting.

 

I decided to contact HSBC in branch (2009) to ask if they knew why I apparently wasn't trustworthy enough for credit

(HSBC deny this, they think that I haven't asked them about my credit rating in over 7 years, ridiculous).

 

In branch the HSBC advisor literally put her arms up in the air and said something along the lines of,

"Oh dear, I'm so sorry, the fraud incident in 2006 has not been cleared from your name

and has been negatively impacting your credit score, we will rectify this asap."

 

I should have created a scene there and then but instead I agreed to allow them to correct it and not create a fuss.

 

By this point I had put my credit facility needs in family members names and friends names,

it put an immense amount of pressure on my family and friends and made basic life unnecessarily difficult.

 

I probably should have gone straight to market and taken out a form of credit,

just to check if they corrected it, but instead I stupidly accepted what they had to say.

 

Looking back at this,

at no point during these telephone calls or face to face meetings in branch did HSBC advise

or even mention that I could complain (let alone tell me they existed) to the FOS

or at least independently check my credit score at a later date using a credit agency.

 

I was in my early 20s and had limited knowledge about financial services and banking regulations and at the end of the day,

I stupidly thought I could trust the bank that I'd been with since I was 10 years old.

 

Fast forward a few years again - 2013.

I'm still getting turned down for credit.

I'm confident that it is nothing to do with HSBC as they have on several occasions promised me the situation would be / had been sorted.

 

I go to get a credit report and guess what,

my credit file in November 2013 stated that I am currently and have been defaulting on a credit card with HSBC since 2006.

I was stunned.

 

I called HSBC again and immediately arranged to visit in branch.

They first of all had the cheek to say that I must have misunderstood my credit report,

I emailed them my credit report and they realised it was crystal clear that it was their mistake.

 

The HSBC advisor in branch informed me about the FOS, for the first time.

 

By December 2013 HSBC told me my credit score had been restored (this isn't the case, will explain later).

I checked my credit score with Experian again and on the surface it did seem that they had rectified it.

My credit score overnight jumped up by nearly 600 points to a new total score of around 900 points!!

The difference between a poor credit score and a good credit score,

the difference between being lent money and not being lent money.

 

I contacted the FOS and they initiated a complaint against HSBC.

 

HSBC wrote to me and admitted in black and white that it was their error

and that I should quantify the damages so they could form a compensation package.

I didn't know where to even start with this.

 

I wrote them a letter explaining how unknowingly to me they have manipulated and negatively impacted

my reputation, career, relationships, psyche, life at the same time as stripping me of any opportunities to engage in any form of borrowing / credit,

which in our society, in my opinion, is pretty much paralysing someone.

 

HSBC have stopped me from buying a property with my partner, she went ahead and got a flat on her own.

 

They have stopped me from setting up my business, forcing me to take any work available.

 

They have forced me into rented accommodation and at times made it very challenging to agree on contracts for rented accommodation

and even on two occasions I was turned away for a flat in London because they carried out a credit report,

the estate agent would not tell me specifics, just that they had run a credit check and it had shown bad results.

 

I have also discovered that I had work / client proposals rejected whilst abroad because of them checking my trustworthiness

through credit reports and again the report portraying me as untrustworthy.

 

The list goes on and on and on, I'm overwhelmed,

 

HSBC have silently turned my life inside out, unjustifiably punished me, all in error,

and all after being asked to rectify the situation several times

and all after assuring me there was nothing to worry about, several times.

 

It's almost too much to mentally process.

 

Related but a slight side note,

whilst travelling in India and the Middle East, I accidentally went over my overdraft limit

and without informing me HSBC suspended my account and blocked my online Internet banking access.

 

Admittedly I was travelling (my transactions in india may have hinted at this?)

but surely they could have used my registered email?

 

The email registered to my Internet banking account perhaps?

 

I tried to engage in credit facilities online to pay off the amount but of course

, no one was prepared to give me credit, I wonder why?

 

When I returned to the UK I cleared all the charges in full and restored my HSBC current account to a clean state.

If I remember correctly I paid them nearly £1800 in charges, fines and monies owed,

I had been out of the country for nearly 18 months.

 

The joke is HSBC offered me £100 compensation for the "stress" caused.

 

Last week Sainsbury's gave my partner and I £30 compensation because our online shopping didn't arrive on time, quite rightly so, and yes we will be using them again.

 

I called the manager of resolutions at HSBC and spoke with him on the phone, after several phone calls they up'd their offer to £1000.

In my eyes this is still a joke. What do you think?

 

If you've got this far, thank you so much for reading.

 

I have just received their final written response offering a grand and asking me to sign to show agreement.

 

I don't know what to do and I was hoping you may be able to give me some kind of advice

or suggest what my next move should be.

 

I'm going to go back to the FOS with the written response

but to be honest I feel like I should just be taking them to court?

 

I need help quantifying the damages and I honestly can't afford to pay a lawyer or accountant to work for me.

 

I'm 27 years old and earn about 16/17k annually as a freelancer,

not enough to pay £200 +vat per hour for someone to listen to my story

and then tell me that I need to pay more in order for them to do anything about it.

 

I would truly be grateful for some pointers, don't know where to turn and it's really getting to me.

 

I have recently checked my credit report, last week, on checkmyfile.com and my scores are still bad,

it still implies that I am untrustworthy and clearly says that i have historically defaulted on credit card payments,

indicated by a red number 4 (worst kind) next to the sole credit card with HSBC's name next to it.

 

Surely the credit card shouldn't even be associated with my name,

especially on information accessible by lenders, employers etc?

 

Surely HSBC should also clear the one time I did default with my overdraft

as they paralysed me from being able to pay it off through other means of credit?

 

Any ideas?

 

I've started building a documented case against HSBC,

I am gathering all the information I can find, I have been contacting previous clients,

who are now aware that I am trustworthy as I can prove to them my reputation was listed as bad in error,

 

one client has already offered to write a statement and stand as a witness if required.

 

Again, thanks for reading.

 

Look forward to hopefully hearing from you.

 

All the best

[dx100uk]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?420961-Richard-Durkin-wins-Supreme-Court-appeal-–-beware-lenders!&highlight=durkin

[picton]

Hey,

 

Thanks for posting link to Richard's case, would be really interested to know if you think this can be tied into my case, I assume you are referring to the wrongly blacklisting part?

 

Anyway, thanks for commenting with link.

 

I'm still not sure how to approach this situation? Continue with FOS or can I take them to court? Can I represent myself at court or do I have to employ an advocate? Sorry for all the questions.

 

Best wishes,

[sequenci]

Hi,

 

Personally, I think the offer of £1,000 is very reasonable.

 

For the record, very few people are going to read the whole of your post.

 

Seq.

[Durkin]

 

in 2006 someone was able to take one out in my name, with my own bank (HSBC).

 

 

A civil court probably wouldn't be interested in something more than 6 years old. A criminal court possibly would.

 

I'm 27 years old

 

 

You're at the peak of your life. Don't let this stress you out any longer.

 

 

I have recently checked my credit report, last week, on checkmyfile.com and my scores are still bad,

it still implies that I am untrustworthy and clearly says that i have historically defaulted on credit card payments,

indicated by a red number 4 (worst kind) next to the sole credit card with HSBC's name next to it.

 

Surely the credit card shouldn't even be associated with my name,

especially on information accessible by lenders, employers etc?

 

This credit card account should be removed. Ask for £8K in damages (Hope that's enough)

 

 

Surely HSBC should also clear the one time I did default with my overdraft

as they paralysed me from being able to pay it off through other means of credit?

 

 

That's probably your main problem. You need to find a human side to HSBC! Good luck with that!

 

Richard

Edited April 10, 2014 by Durkin
Less is more!

[picton]

Thanks for replies.

 

Seq can I ask why you think £1000 is acceptable?

 

Please share what you base that on.

 

 

I personally don't see £1000 as being a reasonable offer considering the international image they have portrayed me under.

 

I lost out on a large contract whilst in the middle east which I have correspondence to support

and I have been stopped from taking part in a culture fuelled by credit?

 

Sorry I don't see how £1000 is really enough, enough to cover the time I have spent writing letters,

chasing hsbc, waiting on telephones etc. but not enough to cover the actual damage they have caused.

 

If people don't want to read the whole post so be it,

 

I'm only really interested in hearing from people that can offer advice,

guidance or experiences that might help inform or shed light.

 

Richard - many thanks for your thoughts,

to be honest I think £8000 would be far more reasonable.

 

What I think is fair is working out how much the bank would penalise me on a daily basis

for not sticking to their agreement and then quite frankly, they should be penalised the same.

 

Anyone else have any thoughts?

 

All the best,

Edited April 10, 2014 by picton
Typo

[sequenci]

Hiya,

 

It's simply an objective opinion. I may or may not be accurate with my opinion, of course - but it is based on having a pretty reasonable understanding of this sort of thing. To succeed with getting a higher figure you're going to need to prove watertight evidence of your true financial losses that flow from their error. Richard's case will certainly help you no end. But do consider how long it took him to get to where he is now.

[picton]

Thanks for elaborating, yeah, I do see where you're coming from

but I feel that I've got conclusive evidence that I was not awarded work because of credit checks carried out on me.

 

I have this in writing, from the employer.

 

I mean that contract alone was worth a lot of money.

 

What would be needed to be considered water tight?

 

The employer are prepared to give statements and attend court if required.

 

How can I go about proving / quantifying damages that go back 5, 6, 7 years?

[Durkin]

 

What I think is fair is working out how much the bank would penalise me on a daily basis for not sticking to their agreement and then quite frankly, they should be penalised the same.

 

 

Agreed. However, to avoid stress you should confine things to small claims (

 

£8K was awarded to me for mere injury to credit without the need to prove specific loss.

 

It was based on folk that had been screwed in a similarway for a few days, as opposed to a few decades.

 

If you're happy with £8K ask for it based on my case. It's binding on all UK courts.

 

Cheers,

 

Richard.

[steampowered]

I have a lot of sympathy with this. It sounds like you do have a decent claim against HSBC. A few things to consider:

 

 

1. Quantifying Loss: It sounds like you have good proof that you have suffered real financial loss. It sounds like the credit report entry for not repaying your overdraft was correct. You may have some difficulty proving that your problems arose to the credit card entries rather than the overdraft entry. 8k is a sensible sum based on the Durkin case as this has gone on for many years and has had serious consequences, but if you can prove more you can go for more. The 8k finding from the Durkin case is not technically binding in England on the issue of how much should be awarded, since the Supreme Court felt it had no jurisdiction to look at findings of fact about the amount of damages made by the courts in Scotland, but is a persuasive starting point.

 

2. Limitations Act: Basically, you can't claim for anything that happened more than six years ago. This would completely bar a claim relating to a wrongful credit entry in 2006. However I imagine the bank makes reports on an ongoing basis, so you can probably rely on more recent reports. If some of the damage you want to claim for is approaching 6 years old, then you need to think about issuing a claim form ASAP to stop the clock.

 

3. Legal costs: If you try to claim more than 10k, it won't be treated as a small claim. If not a small claim you would be liable for the bank's legal costs if you lost (likewise they would be liable for your legal costs if you won). If you don't want to use a solicitor you could try the CAB and you can get decent help on CAG.

 

4. Evidence: Consider whether you have enough evidence to support the various allegations in your post about what HSBC told you. Consider whether it is worth using a SAR to get some of this evidence. It becomes very difficult to use a SAR once litigation or threat of litigation has started ... once you've got the ball rolling a SAR won't work and you'll have to wait until the disclosure stage of litigation which comes a long way into the litigation process. Its a good idea to SAR them, if you are going to SAR them do it immediately.

 

You are not going to get anywhere on the phone with customer resolutions. To get anywhere I think you need to get your case passed to their litigation defence team. This means a formal 'letter before claim' clearly setting out the legal basis of your claim, what you intend to claim for and how it has been calculated.

[picton]

Thank you all for sharing thoughts. Really appreciate it.

 

I'm sorry for my lack of knowledge but what is SAR? From a quick search I'm finding Suspicious Activity Report?

 

I feel confident that my evidence is conclusive and demonstrates the extent of the damage. I can prove that because of a falsely reported negative credit score I was not awarded a large contract whilst working in the middle east. I can prove this for 1 of the contracts I lost out on, there were several other jobs that were not awarded however I am communicating with relevant people to build an even stronger case.

 

Quite simply, in error, they made me look like a crook to the rest of the world and even when asked to correct it, they didn't, unacceptable.

 

Really appreciate you all taking the time to read through my situation.

 

Again, thank you all for contributing to my almost replenished sanity!

 

One other question, these forums are public, so should I remove this post until I've decided on what to do? Surely HSBC can simply read through anything I write on here?

 

All the best and many thanks,

 

Picton

[steampowered]

Glad you find the info useful. SAR is Subject Access Request. Click the link which appears on the word to find out more.

 

Yes, the forums are public so can in theory be read by HSBC. There does not seem to be any personally identifiable information here, a bank like HSBC will be in litigation all the time so I think the risk is small. Even if they did see the post I don't think it matters as it doesn't change the legal merits of the case. We generally discourage removal of posts as they are helpful for others.

[dx100uk]

IMHO I think exposing them on CAG will help your settlement chances 100 fold!

 

I think Richard can vouch for the power of such forums!

 

dx

[Durkin]

they would be liable for your legal costs if you won

 

There are laws, I believe, that protect perpetrators from having to pay all the costs. There could be masses to lose in legal costs outside the small claims court, even if you win, as I'm about to find out.

 

Yes I agree that as much bad publicity for the perpetrators as possible is good. It won't affect your case. Get stuck in on Twitter too. HSBC are getting a fair bit of flak As is parliament. It's great.

 

I understand HFC have had so much, it seems they've effectively stopped lending under the name and are now HSBC. One to avoid. A bit like Norwich Union becoming a part of Aviva.

 

Masssive HSBC fraud about to be unveiled..

 

Cheers,

 

Richard.

[the worm that turned]

My sympathies go to you and what you have had to endure at the hands of a heartless, soulless entity. Rest assured there are many living breathing men and women that empathize with you.

 

The system is inherently corrupt. How sad is it that you feel helpless to take out a claim against this organisation for fear of losing more money or not being able to afford a claim in the first place.

 

I hate to say it, but you could speak to a solicitor, most offer a free initial consultation and they may take on the case as a no win no fee type jobby.

 

I tried the "do it yourself" approach with a bank and although I managed to reduce the final payment to something less than the original claim (and fended off a Summary Judgement - just) I was out of my depth against a barrister and from the city and probably,using a legal firm could have done much better. Lesson learned.

 

Good luck though. You deserve it!

[picton]

Thanks again all, really appreciate you taking the time to give pointers, share experiences and voice opinions. I'm fine with the post staying up, if it can help others then brilliant.

 

I'll keep this thread up-to-date with any news as and when.

 

Many thanks again.

[picton]

Yes I agree that as much bad publicity for the perpetrators as possible is good. It won't affect your case. Get stuck in on Twitter too.

 

Completely agree, going to get stuck in, thanks Richard.

[picton]

Yes I agree that as much bad publicity for the perpetrators as possible is good. It won't affect your case. Get stuck in on Twitter too.

 

Completely agree, going to get stuck in, thanks Richard.

[steampowered]

If you claim a specific amount which is less than 10k, the claim will be small claims track. In SCT only very limited fixed legal costs and a few things like court fees are recoverable. Legal costs can only be recovered against a side who has acted unreasonably.

 

Outside SCT, the loser pays the winner's legal costs. This is usually on the standard basis which is limited to costs which are reasonable and proportionate. As a general rule of thumb this leads to 70% costs recovery although the amount varies. If one side has acted unreasonable they might be subject to an indemnity basis costs order which leads to higher recovery. There is a body of rules and case law, as well as full textbooks, about what costs can be recovered.

 

Things get a little more complicated where the claimant is awarded damages, but the amount falls short of the amount he was claiming. In this situation it is not always completely clear who is the winner and who is the loser. You can have a situation where the costs order is split between different claims or only a percentage of costs is awarded. This happened in the Durkin case, as the amount claimed was in excess of 100k but the amount eventually awarded was 8k ... I'm not sure what the cost outcome was in this situation.

 

In the English system you can tip the scales in your favour, outside SCT, by using what are called Part 36 offers. The basic idea is that you make a settlement offer. If you go to trial and beat that settlement offer, your opponent must automatically pay your costs on the indemnity basis plus an extra 10% of the amount awarded.