Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Update: This afternoon I got a letter from Drydens (on behalf of their client Erudio) that says: Please find enclosed, by way of service, a copy of Notice of Discontinuance sent to the Court under cover of our letter of today's date. The enclosed Notice of Discontinuance has - for all of this claim - ticked. I'm clueless about legal stuff, but I assume that means they have withdrawn their Claim?  Should I celebrate? During my hearing, when adjourning the court date, the Judge ordered that no more evidence is to be handed in by either party. I assume that they did not think they would win, therefore filed for Discontinuance.  I'm just confused how this is in their favour as they will lose the money they spent so far.  What I'm also unclear about is - does this mean that they can submit another Claim with different evidence? Or once they Discontinued they can't sue me again for the same reason?  Let's see what their next move is. Can't thank you enough for all your help!  
    • Couldn't get back to you this afternoon I will tidy it up in the morning ready for the deadline Andy  
    • @jk2054 Received the order of judgement today and Evri have also paid. @BankFodder and JK - I've recently sold an item on Ebay and this time, I did not use Packlink or Evri to send the item to the recipient (used Royal Mail and item successfully delivered). However, I took screenshots of the process to go through Packlink to book a delivery service such as Evri, as i thought it would be useful for you and other members of this forum to see how someone would choose a delivery service through Packlink, and the information that's available about the parcel value, delivery service, compensation etc.  It may also be helpful in future WS / Bundles as an example to show that Packlink is an intermediary / comparison service which provides users with a list of services of delivery companies and the user selects the option that best meets their needs. The screenshots are in the attached pdf. You'll note that A lot of the information is pre-populated such as the order value (which cannot be changed), recipient's address etc. and there is a list of different couriers / delivery services, the compensation they offer, and the price of using 1 of the couriers/delivery services. Towards the end, there is an option to select full compensation coverage from Packlink, and proof of delivery, and the costs for each of these services. In each of the screenshots, there is a prominent message that by clicking "purchase postage label", the user is acknowledging and accept that their purchase will be subject to Packlink terms and conditions - these are the Terms and Conditions that Evri provided in their defence witness statement in my case, and that I used to explain to the judge that under these T&Cs, there is a contract with the delivery company. Delivery service selection on Packlink (redacted).pdf
  • 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

Mortgage Shortfall (which isnt a shortfall)*** Written Off***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3551 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

I have been contacted today by shoosmiths to repay a mortgage shortfall.

 

In 2008 they began repossession of my home at the begining of the case i owed £71,000 to HSBC and £7,000 to EPF (EPF was acquired by HSBC after i had taken out the loan).

 

So total owing was £78,000. The property was sold at just over £82,000 in 2010 under the mortgage rescue scheme.

 

Shoosmiths are asking me to repay a "Mortgage Shortfall" of £8,000

 

This is not a shortfall, it is court costs (which i have asked for a breakdown of on many occasions and not received)

 

I believe that calling this a shortfall is fraud they would have only six years to claim court costs by calling it a shortfall they have increased that to 12 years.

 

I know that there is a clause in the contract allowing them to add costs to the mortgage but surely this clause must be unfair if it only allows an act which would otherwise be unlawful.

 

I am currently unemployed so they have no chance of getting it anyway.

 

I would like to stop them calling this a shortfall.

 

They also spent 6 months arguing (HSBC and EPF which by this time part of HSBC) who was going to show this so called shortfall. charging more interest whilst they did it.

 

 

I have to reply in 14 days

 

any views or ideas

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just in case they say that the court costs were deducted from the sale of the property and the remainder used to pay off the mortgage would they be allowed to do this?

 

 

Hi RDM,

Responding to your PM.

 

 

Will read through and get back.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been contacted today by shoosmiths to repay a mortgage shortfall.

 

In 2008 they began repossession of my home at the begining of the case i owed £71,000 to HSBC and £7,000 to EPF (EPF was acquired by HSBC after i had taken out the loan).

 

So total owing was £78,000. The property was sold at just over £82,000 in 2010 under the mortgage rescue scheme.

 

Shoosmiths are asking me to repay a "Mortgage Shortfall" of £8,000

 

This is not a shortfall, it is court costs (which i have asked for a breakdown of on many occasions and not received)

 

I believe that calling this a shortfall is fraud they would have only six years to claim court costs by calling it a shortfall they have increased that to 12 years.

 

I know that there is a clause in the contract allowing them to add costs to the mortgage but surely this clause must be unfair if it only allows an act which would otherwise be unlawful.

 

I am currently unemployed so they have no chance of getting it anyway.

 

I would like to stop them calling this a shortfall.

 

They also spent 6 months arguing (HSBC and EPF which by this time part of HSBC) who was going to show this so called shortfall. charging more interest whilst they did it.

 

 

I have to reply in 14 days

 

any views or ideas

 

 

 

Hi Rdm,

 

 

Are shoosmiths acting on behalf of HSBC?

 

 

When did the repo take place in 2008 (day/month).

 

 

I reckon you will need to SAR HSBC on this, one request will cover the original mortgage and the subsequent loan acquired by them.

 

 

Dear Shoosmiths,

 

 

I refer to your letter dated xx.xx xxxx., in regard to an alleged " shortfall" debt arising allegedly from a mortgage with HSBC.

 

 

Please not I have no knowledge of any such " shortfall " debt and refute any liability.

 

 

If Shoosmsmiths intend to pursue this matter forward I require it to produce unequivocal proof of how this has arisen and how the amount claimed has been calculated.

 

 

I will allow 7 (seven ) working days from the date hereon for a response if no response is received within that time scale I will consider the matter closed.

 

 

Check the free CRA Noddle to see if there is any entry there.

 

 

Claiming this a mortgage shortfall could be OK the Council of Mortgage lenders agreed that its members would not seek repayment of shortfalls after 6 years has elapsed without being in contact with the alleged debtor

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Claiming this a mortgage shortfall could be OK the Council of Mortgage lenders agreed that its members would not seek repayment of shortfalls after 6 years has elapsed without being in contact with the alleged debtor

 

I am unsure how can they claim it is a Mortgage Shortfall when there were excess proceeds from the sale. a debt yes but a "Mortgage shortfall" ???

 

and yes HSBC and it is not on my cra file

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am unsure how can they claim it is a Mortgage Shortfall when there were excess proceeds from the sale. a debt yes but a "Mortgage shortfall" ???

 

and yes HSBC and it is not on my cra file

 

 

 

 

Your post 2# could be the answer a SAR should tell one way or the other.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your post 2# could be the answer a SAR should tell one way or the other.

 

 

I have requested this info so many times already under SAR but never get it

 

does this letter sound ok

 

 

 

Dear Sir,

Thank you for you letter dated XXXXXXXX. I do not acknowledge a debt to you or your client.

 

 

The information I have requested (and still require if you intend to take this further) is a full breakdown of the COURT COSTS and not a statement of accounts, however, in addition to this I would also like a statement detailing how the proceeds of the sale (£82,250 approx) were attributed and a statement of all accounts as at the day before proceedings commenced in 2008.

 

I note that you state the money allegedly owed by me is a “Mortgage Shortfall”, Please explain with a detailed breakdown how this could possibly happen, In 2008 at the beginning of the repossession we owed approximately £71,000 to HSBC and £7,000 to EPF (a division of HSBC) totalling £79,000 which would leave a net excess of £3,250.

 

Calling something that which it is not in order to make a gain (either financial or a gain in rights) is, in my opinion, an act of fraud. I note that a debt of court costs would allow your client the right to chase payment for 6 years before this would be “Statute Barred”, however, a mortgage shortfall would allow them the right to chase payment for 12 years, a gain in the right to chase payment for a further 6 years.

 

In a statement of truth from yourselves you claimed that HSBC were unable to produce documents requested by me, you then went on to state that these documents were irrelevant. Please explain the following:-

 

· How you read a document which could not be reproduced due to cost in order to know that its content was irrelevant.

· If it was reproduced and read then how were the costs of printing and postage so high that it would not be cost effective to send to me.

 

Your client offered to “write off” any outstanding debt if we were to withdraw our defence from the case.

 

I am currently in receipt of state benefits ESA and would not have the funds to repay this alleged debt.

 

I would request that your client write off this alleged debt as it offered to do during the case in question.

 

Please either confirm that your client has written off this alleged debt or provide the information requested above.

 

If this doesnt work ill SAR again

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks good to me rdm.

 

 

Please let us know the result.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Well done rdm...thread title amended.

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...