HFO CAPITAL/services/turnbull CCJ

[Docman]

Let's hope HFO have gone bust!

[melmumof3]

no news to report, the judge wanted to clarify i had received the application for HFO to change their name from hfo services to hfo capital, which i have in july. being referred back to judge urgently, am ringing tomorrow to see what judge has ordered... drawn out or what lol. im thinking surely if they have all HFO have on me, something would have happened by now?

[Docman]

Mel

 

I think you need to contact the court again URGENTLY. HFO are trying their usual trick of swopping the names of the companies. You should tell the court that you want to object to the name change.

 

Even if the Judge has already made an Order, without representations or a hearing, I think you have seven days to object - which you should.

[melmumof3]

Mel

 

I think you need to contact the court again URGENTLY. HFO are trying their usual trick of swopping the names of the companies. You should tell the court that you want to object to the name change.

 

Even if the Judge has already made an Order, without representations or a hearing, I think you have seven days to object - which you should.

hi docman

they applied to the court they wanted to change name about july time... is it too late to object now? i didnt know this was a HFO 'trick'.. why do they do that? is it to stall??....

[melmumof3]

i was reading another thread on here, about HFO capital being based in dublin.. who are we actually dealing with FFS!!!... im confused is anyone else lol..

[broken arrow]

I do not think they can just change the name of the claimant without assigning from one to the other.

They will try as they have no respect for court procedures.

If they have assigned from sevices to capital or vice versa, they should send you notice of this and then you need to see the deed of assignment, they will object to you seeing the deed but they have had to before, this is important as it might not comply fully with the law of property act and companies act.

[Docman]

BA

 

The CPR do allow a change of name in proceedings BUT the new claimant has to show that they are entitled to continue with the claim. In HFO's case, they argue that a 'mistake' has been made by either the solicitors (Turnem & Rachtett) or the 'client' ie HFO Services. Since both T&R and Services are controlled by the same person (Mr T), it is difficult to see how there can be a 'mistake'. Also don't forget that HFO/TR's have made a 'Statement of Truth' to the court in making the original POCs.

 

The thing is that when it comes to the Notice of Assignment, there are only a few legal cases to guide you. The key test that Lord Denning laid down is that the debtor must 'reasonable certain' to whom the debt has been assigned to.

 

In seeking to change the name, IMO, HFO/T&R are either showing that they have lied to the court (naughty for a solicitor) OR they are not certain who the assignee actually is ie HFO Services or HFO Capital. And if they aren't certain, the debtor cannot be certain and therefore the Assignment is not valid.

[melmumof3]

BA

 

The CPR do allow a change of name in proceedings BUT the new claimant has to show that they are entitled to continue with the claim. In HFO's case, they argue that a 'mistake' has been made by either the solicitors (Turnem & Rachtett) or the 'client' ie HFO Services. Since both T&R and Services are controlled by the same person (Mr T), it is difficult to see how there can be a 'mistake'. Also don't forget that HFO/TR's have made a 'Statement of Truth' to the court in making the original POCs.

 

The thing is that when it comes to the Notice of Assignment, there are only a few legal cases to guide you. The key test that Lord Denning laid down is that the debtor must 'reasonable certain' to whom the debt has been assigned to.

 

In seeking to change the name, IMO, HFO/T&R are either showing that they have lied to the court (naughty for a solicitor) OR they are not certain who the assignee actually is ie HFO Services or HFO Capital. And if they aren't certain, the debtor cannot be certain and therefore the Assignment is not valid.

hi again,

its really obvious now to me how youve put the last piece... i am confused WHO i actually am meant to owe money to now... so i should now ring the court yes?? saying im not happy with HFO changing the name from HFO services to capital, as all my correspondence i hold from the says HFO services ltd....

[Docman]

You can let the court know that you object but if you have left matters for a few weeks, any objection before the judge makes a decison may be tricky, depending on how the judge views these change of name applications. Personally, I think I would phone the court and say I want to object and ask about the best way. Some courts will accept a letter, others want a formal application of objection.

[melmumof3]

ive rang court, they say i need to write to judge and explain to her etc...

This is what HFO wrote on the new application notice reason for change of name

'HFO capital assigned the defendants account. HFO serices are the collections agents for HFO capital limited and due to an inadvertent I.T error whilst issuing the claim online, the claim was issued in the name of HFO services, as opposed to HFO capital, the current assignee of the defendants account as stated in the particulars of claim.'

ive looked at names on my paperwork from hfo services, and from turnbull, and some of the solicitors letters have hfo capital on them others hfo services..... confused!

[Docman]

IT error I bet! These are a buch of jokers.

 

Ok, we'll need to draft a letter to the judge. In any of the paperwork, have you had a letter from HFO Capital Ltd, howing its address?

[broken arrow]

Normally it is Capital to Services as was in my case and yes they made the same inadvertant error and I am not the only one.

[melmumof3]

IT error I bet! These are a buch of jokers.

 

Ok, we'll need to draft a letter to the judge. In any of the paperwork, have you had a letter from HFO Capital Ltd, howing its address?

hi again,

no havent got anything with address from HFO capital, they technically havent sent me a letter....

all letters from TR before april have HFO services, after april, all saying hfo capital...

my default notice they sent in march has current creditor as HFO capital, and collections agent HFO services....

[Docman]

In my case they claimed Services had been used in the N1 instead of Capital "inadvertedly". And I am willing to bet there are quite a few other such mistakes.

Mel, you need to make two points in your letter to the judge. First that the claim is from HFO Services Ltd, a company controlled by Mr T as sole director, and that Mr T is the only solicitor at T&R . He is in effect both the claimant and the claimant's solicitor. As a solicitor, he should take greater care in submitting claims to the court which are accompanied with a Statement of Truth.

Second, you point out that the letters told you that the alleged debt had been assigned to HFO Capital Ltd did not come from M&S. HFO Capital Ltd is not registered in the UK and therefore you were not able to confirm its existence. You were asked to write to HFO Services Ltd, which is registered in the UK and then which brought the claim. You believed that any assignment was to HFO Services Ltd, as confirmed by the N1 claim form.

Therefore, either Mr T as a solicitor has either misled to the court or he is not certain that HFO Services Ltd was the assignee. You have been advised that the law requires some certainty and quote Lord Denning, the Master of the Rolls, said

“I think the correct interpretation of this statute was given by Atkin J in Denney, Gasquet, and Metcalfe v Conklin. It is quite plain from his judgment that no formal requirements are required for a notice of assignment. It is sufficient if it brings ([1913] 3 KB at p 180):

"to the notice of the debtor with reasonable certainty the fact that the deed does assign the debt due from the debtor so as to bind the debt in his hands and prevent him from paying the debt to the original creditor."

Van Lynn Developments Ltd v Pelias Construction Co Ltd [1968] 3 All ER 824.

You make the point that as T&R are now making a change of name application, they are not certain and if they are not certain, you cannot be ‘reasonable certain’ as the case law requires.

You should end the letter by submitting that either T&R have misled the court and cannot now be believed or that they are uncertain as to the assignee and therefore their case is fundamentally flawed and should be dismissed.

[melmumof3]

In my case they claimed Services had been used in the N1 instead of Capital "inadvertedly". And I am willing to bet there are quite a few other such mistakes.

Mel, you need to make two points in your letter to the judge. First that the claim is from HFO Services Ltd, a company controlled by Mr T as sole director, and that Mr T is the only solicitor at T&R . He is in effect both the claimant and the claimant's solicitor. As a solicitor, he should take greater care in submitting claims to the court which are accompanied with a Statement of Truth.

Second, you point out that the letters told you that the alleged debt had been assigned to HFO Capital Ltd did not come from M&S. HFO Capital Ltd is not registered in the UK and therefore you were not able to confirm its existence. You were asked to write to HFO Services Ltd, which is registered in the UK and then which brought the claim. You believed that any assignment was to HFO Services Ltd, as confirmed by the N1 claim form.

Therefore, either Mr T as a solicitor has either misled to the court or he is not certain that HFO Services Ltd was the assignee. You have been advised that the law requires some certainty and quote Lord Denning, the Master of the Rolls, said

“I think the correct interpretation of this statute was given by Atkin J in Denney, Gasquet, and Metcalfe v Conklin. It is quite plain from his judgment that no formal requirements are required for a notice of assignment. It is sufficient if it brings ([1913] 3 KB at p 180):

"to the notice of the debtor with reasonable certainty the fact that the deed does assign the debt due from the debtor so as to bind the debt in his hands and prevent him from paying the debt to the original creditor."

Van Lynn Developments Ltd v Pelias Construction Co Ltd [1968] 3 All ER 824.

You make the point that as T&R are now making a change of name application, they are not certain and if they are not certain, you cannot be ‘reasonable certain’ as the case law requires.

You should end the letter by submitting that either T&R have misled the court and cannot now be believed or that they are uncertain as to the assignee and therefore their case is fundamentally flawed and should be dismissed.

thankyou for that docman....is there a template letter i can use somewhere? i dont know how to first word the letter myself... or maybe ill start a letter, and someone have a look over it later for me ??

[Docman]

Ok, but can you post up the change of name application from T&R after taking out your personal information so that a draft can be prepared.

[DonkeyB]

What Docman says is a good point. On the OFT database (I think.. or is it FSA?), Turnbull Rutherford is OFFICIALLY listed as 'running' HFO Services - they are one and the same. They cannot claim client/solicitor miscommunication.

[melmumof3]

gotta sort out a pic to post up of application today...

 

just rang court and the judge has lifted it to a small claim hearing..... looks like im going to court then...

[melmumof3]

just had my court date sent, its set for 2nd dec:( scared now... didnt know HFO have to pay £300 court fee..

[patrickq1]

hi i will be subbing to this thread,Dont be worrying yourself i have nt read all of the thread yet,so i will get up to speed and see where you are with this are they still trying to claim the additional 1200 or thereabouts that you mentioned at the start of your thread ...will follow on from this later this evening first and foremost please dont worry you are in control not them you dictate the pace not them and you will get this sorted out ,also if you are getting any threats from them via harrassment phone call report them imediately to the FSA and ICO log as many calls from them as is possible

patrickq1

[patrickq1]

Apparently they are no longer in Wimbledon (the postie told me) so I suspect they are only operating from Weybridge now with 'outsourced services' in India and athe Phillippines (I suspect the former to be the most active, the latter are a newer lot).

just to throw some more confusion as to HFO passing data they have already breached the DATA PROTECTION ACT also it looks like the have entered unlawful default notices..remember they can only enter one default ,how many defaults have you had from both M AND S and HFO

upto their dirty tricks again i see

patrickq1

 

Part I Preliminary

 

1 Basic interpretative provisions

 

(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires—

• “data” means information which—
  (a)
  is being processed by means of equipment operating automatically in response to instructions given for that purpose,
   
  (b)
  is recorded with the intention that it should be processed by means of such equipment,
   
  ©
  is recorded as part of a relevant filing system or with the intention that it should form part of a relevant filing system, or
   
  (d)
  does not fall within paragraph (a), (b) or © but forms part of an accessible record as defined by section 68;
   
   
   
  
• “data controller” means, subject to subsection (4), a person who (either alone or jointly or in common with other persons) determines the purposes for which and the manner in which any personal data are, or are to be, processed;
  
• “data processor”, in relation to personal data, means any person (other than an employee of the data controller) who processes the data on behalf of the data controller;
  
• “data subject” means an individual who is the subject of personal data;
  
• “personal data” means data which relate to a living individual who can be identified—
  (a)
  from those data, or
   
  (b)
  from those data and other information which is in the possession of, or is likely to come into the possession of, the data controller,
   
   
   
  and includes any expression of opinion about the individual and any indication of the intentions of the data controller or any other person in respect of the individual;
  
• “processing”, in relation to information or data, means obtaining, recording or holding the information or data or carrying out any operation or set of operations on the information or data, including—
  (a)
  organisation, adaptation or alteration of the information or data,
   
  (b)
  retrieval, consultation or use of the information or data,
   
  ©
  disclosure of the information or data by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, or
   
  (d)
  alignment, combination, blocking, erasure or destruction of the information or data;
   
   
   
  
• “relevant filing system” means any set of information relating to individuals to the extent that, although the information is not processed by means of equipment operating automatically in response to instructions given for that purpose, the set is structured, either by reference to individuals or by reference to criteria relating to individuals, in such a way that specific information relating to a particular individual is readily accessible.
  

(2) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires—

(a) “obtaining” or “recording”, in relation to personal data, includes obtaining or recording the information to be contained in the data, and

(b) “using” or “disclosing”, in relation to personal data, includes using or disclosing the information contained in the data.

(3) In determining for the purposes of this Act whether any information is recorded with the intention—

(a) that it should be processed by means of equipment operating automatically in response to instructions given for that purpose, or

(b) that it should form part of a relevant filing system,

it is immaterial that it is intended to be so processed or to form part of such a system only after being transferred to a country or territory outside the European Economic Area.

(4) Where personal data are processed only for purposes for which they are required by or under any enactment to be processed, the person on whom the obligation to process the data is imposed by or under that enactment is for the purposes of this Act the data controller.

2 Sensitive personal data

 

In this Act “sensitive personal data” means personal data consisting of information as to—

(a) the racial or ethnic origin of the data subject,

(b) his political opinions,

© his religious beliefs or other beliefs of a similar nature,

(d) whether he is a member of a trade union (within the meaning of the [1992 c. 52.] Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992),

(e) his physical or mental health or condition,

(f) his sexual life,

(g) the commission or alleged commission by him of any offence, or

(h) any proceedings for any offence committed or alleged to have been committed by him, the disposal of such proceedings or the sentence of any court in such proceedings.

3 The special purposes

 

In this Act “the special purposes” means any one or more of the following—

(a) the purposes of journalism,

(b) artistic purposes, and

© literary purposes.

4 The data protection principles

 

(1) References in this Act to the data protection principles are to the principles set out in Part I of Schedule 1.

(2) Those principles are to be interpreted in accordance with Part II of Schedule 1.

(3) Schedule 2 (which applies to all personal data) and Schedule 3 (which applies only to sensitive personal data) set out conditions applying for the purposes of the first principle; and Schedule 4 sets out cases in which the eighth principle does not apply.

(4) Subject to section 27(1), it shall be the duty of a data controller to comply with the data protection principles in relation to all personal data with respect to which he is the data controller.

5 Application of Act

 

(1) Except as otherwise provided by or under section 54, this Act applies to a data controller in respect of any data only if—

(a) the data controller is established in the United Kingdom and the data are processed in the context of that establishment, or

(b) the data controller is established neither in the United Kingdom nor in any other EEA State but uses equipment in the United Kingdom for processing the data otherwise than for the purposes of transit through the United Kingdom.

(2) A data controller falling within subsection (1)(b) must nominate for the purposes of this Act a representative established in the United Kingdom.

(3) For the purposes of subsections (1) and (2), each of the following is to be treated as established in the United Kingdom—

(a) an individual who is ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom,

(b) a body incorporated under the law of, or of any part of, the United Kingdom,

© a partnership or other unincorporated association formed under the law of any part of the United Kingdom, and

(d) any person who does not fall within paragraph (a), (b) or © but maintains in the United Kingdom—

(i) an office, branch or agency through which he carries on any activity, or

(ii) a regular practice;

and the reference to establishment in any other EEA State has a corresponding meaning.

[melmumof3]

hi i will be subbing to this thread,Dont be worrying yourself i have nt read all of the thread yet,so i will get up to speed and see where you are with this are they still trying to claim the additional 1200 or thereabouts that you mentioned at the start of your thread ...will follow on from this later this evening first and foremost please dont worry you are in control not them you dictate the pace not them and you will get this sorted out ,also if you are getting any threats from them via harrassment phone call report them imediately to the FSA and ICO log as many calls from them as is possible

patrickq1

 

hi patrick

thanks for the reassurance. as far as i know they are claiming all interest on top of Original amount. No, not getting harrassed anymore via phone , and they havent wrote in a while either, maybe they have run out of letterheaded paper lol...

[patrickq1]

hi

well ive just got round to checking credit report, and well well well, HFO have entered a default against me on te 15th march 09. also the figure on this is £2,722, but my total amount on court claim letter is over 4k?????

and also another DCA Marlin have also put a default in on the 29th march, i have not heard a dickiebird from them in months, and DEFINATELY havent received a default noticed, they have gona as far as sending my sainsbo's app form and thats it.

what happens now then peeps?????

ive printed it all off, did i need to do this????

 

regards mel

you need to find out which company has entered what looks like an illegal default or incorrect default notice as the figures are wrong ,this needs to be pointed out to the judge and depending on which company 's data controller entered the default is it a company who are outside the EEU ...all these facts need to be entered into you POC as you reserve the right to alter your POC due to HFO deliberate mistake ...

[melmumof3]

just to throw some more confusion as to HFO passing data they have already breached the DATA PROTECTION ACT also it looks like the have entered unlawful default notices..remember they can only enter one default ,how many defaults have you had from both M AND S and HFO

upto their dirty tricks again i see

patrickq1

 

Part I Preliminary

 

1 Basic interpretative provisions

 

(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires—

• “data” means information which—
  (a)
  is being processed by means of equipment operating automatically in response to instructions given for that purpose,
   
  (b)
  is recorded with the intention that it should be processed by means of such equipment,
   
  ©
  is recorded as part of a relevant filing system or with the intention that it should form part of a relevant filing system, or
   
  (d)
  does not fall within paragraph (a), (b) or © but forms part of an accessible record as defined by section 68;
   
   
   
  
• “data controller” means, subject to subsection (4), a person who (either alone or jointly or in common with other persons) determines the purposes for which and the manner in which any personal data are, or are to be, processed;
  
• “data processor”, in relation to personal data, means any person (other than an employee of the data controller) who processes the data on behalf of the data controller;
  
• “data subject” means an individual who is the subject of personal data;
  
• “personal data” means data which relate to a living individual who can be identified—
  (a)
  from those data, or
   
  (b)
  from those data and other information which is in the possession of, or is likely to come into the possession of, the data controller,
   
   
   
  and includes any expression of opinion about the individual and any indication of the intentions of the data controller or any other person in respect of the individual;
  
• “processing”, in relation to information or data, means obtaining, recording or holding the information or data or carrying out any operation or set of operations on the information or data, including—
  (a)
  organisation, adaptation or alteration of the information or data,
   
  (b)
  retrieval, consultation or use of the information or data,
   
  ©
  disclosure of the information or data by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, or
   
  (d)
  alignment, combination, blocking, erasure or destruction of the information or data;
   
   
   
  
• “relevant filing system” means any set of information relating to individuals to the extent that, although the information is not processed by means of equipment operating automatically in response to instructions given for that purpose, the set is structured, either by reference to individuals or by reference to criteria relating to individuals, in such a way that specific information relating to a particular individual is readily accessible.
  

(2) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires—

(a) “obtaining” or “recording”, in relation to personal data, includes obtaining or recording the information to be contained in the data, and

(b) “using” or “disclosing”, in relation to personal data, includes using or disclosing the information contained in the data.

(3) In determining for the purposes of this Act whether any information is recorded with the intention—

(a) that it should be processed by means of equipment operating automatically in response to instructions given for that purpose, or

(b) that it should form part of a relevant filing system,

it is immaterial that it is intended to be so processed or to form part of such a system only after being transferred to a country or territory outside the European Economic Area.

(4) Where personal data are processed only for purposes for which they are required by or under any enactment to be processed, the person on whom the obligation to process the data is imposed by or under that enactment is for the purposes of this Act the data controller.

2 Sensitive personal data

 

In this Act “sensitive personal data” means personal data consisting of information as to—

(a) the racial or ethnic origin of the data subject,

(b) his political opinions,

© his religious beliefs or other beliefs of a similar nature,

(d) whether he is a member of a trade union (within the meaning of the [1992 c. 52.] Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992),

(e) his physical or mental health or condition,

(f) his sexual life,

(g) the commission or alleged commission by him of any offence, or

(h) any proceedings for any offence committed or alleged to have been committed by him, the disposal of such proceedings or the sentence of any court in such proceedings.

3 The special purposes

 

In this Act “the special purposes” means any one or more of the following—

(a) the purposes of journalism,

(b) artistic purposes, and

© literary purposes.

4 The data protection principles

 

(1) References in this Act to the data protection principles are to the principles set out in Part I of Schedule 1.

(2) Those principles are to be interpreted in accordance with Part II of Schedule 1.

(3) Schedule 2 (which applies to all personal data) and Schedule 3 (which applies only to sensitive personal data) set out conditions applying for the purposes of the first principle; and Schedule 4 sets out cases in which the eighth principle does not apply.

(4) Subject to section 27(1), it shall be the duty of a data controller to comply with the data protection principles in relation to all personal data with respect to which he is the data controller.

5 Application of Act

 

(1) Except as otherwise provided by or under section 54, this Act applies to a data controller in respect of any data only if—

(a) the data controller is established in the United Kingdom and the data are processed in the context of that establishment, or

(b) the data controller is established neither in the United Kingdom nor in any other EEA State but uses equipment in the United Kingdom for processing the data otherwise than for the purposes of transit through the United Kingdom.

(2) A data controller falling within subsection (1)(b) must nominate for the purposes of this Act a representative established in the United Kingdom.

(3) For the purposes of subsections (1) and (2), each of the following is to be treated as established in the United Kingdom—

(a) an individual who is ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom,

(b) a body incorporated under the law of, or of any part of, the United Kingdom,

© a partnership or other unincorporated association formed under the law of any part of the United Kingdom, and

(d) any person who does not fall within paragraph (a), (b) or © but maintains in the United Kingdom—

(i) an office, branch or agency through which he carries on any activity, or

(ii) a regular practice;

and the reference to establishment in any other EEA State has a corresponding meaning.

i have one with 'm and s' on the letterhead, but it wasnt actually from m&s they confirmed that to me over the phone, and told me when the last letter was from them. the m and s one was in with a HFO letter, and when i held the paper to light, it had the same watermarked design on paper but who would believe me?... well HFO also sent me a 'HFO' default letter.

[melmumof3]

you need to find out which company has entered what looks like an illegal default or incorrect default notice as the figures are wrong ,this needs to be pointed out to the judge and depending on which company 's data controller entered the default is it a company who are outside the EEU ...all these facts need to be entered into you POC as you reserve the right to alter your POC due to HFO deliberate mistake ...

to do what you suggest ,do i need to check my credit report again to do this, as when i checked the info in april, i did the experian thingee for 28 days..... also what is POC please? cant remember, i need to get a brain really, very adled, 2 kids playing toys grr grr grr