Jump to content


HFO CAPITAL/services/turnbull CCJ


melmumof3
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2536 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

It will be interesting to see on what grounds they have appealed. I doubt they can change the claimant to HFO Services at this stage.

 

I'm not sure if you can challenge an appeal in the same way you can challenge a set aside. Also, I don't know if you're entitled to know the grounds of the appeal before it's made. Hopefully someone can advise.

 

My my, Mr T, you would have done so much better to walk away from this one. Now we're getting very angry... and you wouldn't like us when we're angry...

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 665
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

It is a very big mistake to anger the good CAG people, we are here to defend our consumer rights just as much as you might like to defend your legal rights...

 

Mr T and HFO should have been closed down a long time ago... but of course it isn't going to happen, as they 'provide much needed jobs' for 'lower intelligence' people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr T and HFO should have been closed down a long time ago... but of course it isn't going to happen

 

Don't be so sure about that, sillygirl! Wheels are in motion on many fronts to bring down the evil empire ;)

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure Mel... there are certainly cases where people have had more than one bite at the cherry by issuing new claims - see here:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/210585-claim-struck-out-can.html

 

Don't panic - I feel a lot of CAG-inspired witness statements coming to help you!

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks DB....ive read all the thread, what is res judicata, and is it relevant to my own case?....

 

A matter (already) judged ;). Seems relevant.

 

M

________________________________________________________________

ALL unsolicited PMs and E-mails should be posted up - Not all on CAG are who they appear to be

 

 

My views are my own. If in doubt, seek professional advice. If I can help though, I will. CAG helped me!!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

mel

 

I feard they wold have started again and issued a fresh N1 claim form. You could then have raised the 'res judicta' efence - It litterally means 'the matter have been adjudged'. SurfaceagentX20 did an excellent post on it a few months back. If I can find the reference I'll post up.

 

However, it looks like HFO are going down the expensive route (for them) of appealing. I think you will have to see what comes from the court about the grounds for the appeal.

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks DB....ive read all the thread, what is res judicata, and is it relevant to my own case?....

 

 

It means that you cannot bring a new claim which is substantively the same as one that has already failed in the legal process.

 

Not relevant to an appeal, BUT would prevent them re-issuing any new claim.

 

so, basically the appeal is the end of the road

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the extract I took from X20's excellent post-

res judicata.doc

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Docman, MandM

 

I think an appeal is their only option - albeit a stupid one, is it will open a huge can of very squiggly worms for them concerning their deeds of assignment and their dodgy witness statements.

 

To begin a claim in a different name on the same evidence would be vexatious and would probably require the permission of the court.

 

Still, mel can keep us all amused in 2010 as we help her demolish HFO single-handedly...

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Docman, MandM

 

I think an appeal is their only option - albeit a stupid one, is it will open a huge can of very squiggly worms for them concerning their deeds of assignment and their dodgy witness statements.

 

To begin a claim in a different name on the same evidence would be vexatious and would probably require the permission of the court.

 

Still, mel can keep us all amused in 2010 as we help her demolish HFO single-handedly...

lol....:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still, mel can keep us all amused in 2010 as we help her demolish HFO single-handedly...

 

I find this thread more gripping than anything on TV :D:D:D that's for sure. There's been some cracking work done here and I feel that Mel is in the safest of hands.

 

Will continue watching with interest and see what unfolds.

 

Best of luck Mel

 

M

________________________________________________________________

ALL unsolicited PMs and E-mails should be posted up - Not all on CAG are who they appear to be

 

 

My views are my own. If in doubt, seek professional advice. If I can help though, I will. CAG helped me!!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find this thread more gripping than anything on TV :D:D:D that's for sure. There's been some cracking work done here and I feel that Mel is in the safest of hands.

 

Will continue watching with interest and see what unfolds.

 

Best of luck Mel

 

M

its just like a soap my thread, fictitious character names and made up as its gone along lol

 

serious note, i wish i wasnt so damn scared again!...:|

 

You did me and yourselves proud, and WE can do it again i hope :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

dont worry mum he knows he is on a very very sticky wicket and if neccessary we may now even be able to bring the law to bear upon them for trying to pervert the court of justice so let us know asap what they are appealing against

patrickq1

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by patrickq1 are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

I said I was going on hiatus but this caught my attention...

 

What an absolute act of desperation from this company... I'm not keen on them bringing these types of cases to court anyway simply because they must know the legal ground is shaky at best. But to appeal on the basis of their completely dodgy assignments?

 

I will help you fight this tooth and nail mel...

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for them replies patrick and john... i shall let everyone know what they are appealing against (i assume its over the confusion of who owns the debt, clarified with this new M and S letter sent to me last week... will be their new evidence i guess?...)

 

have a fab christmas all xxx

Link to post
Share on other sites

VJ, get some rest and time with the family - you've done so much on here recently for so many people and you deserve a break. There's enough of us gnarled old gits here to get by.

 

The appeal is a mistake. Of the highest order. They have effectively asked for the assignment deeds to be looked at in detail.

 

Bring it on, Alice. Hope you have reinforced knickers.

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the meantime, Mel, go back to what I said earlier - call M&S again, record the call (find a way - I can help!) and ask why they have changed their story.

 

Ask specifically why they have written to you again in contradiction of a previous letter. Ask directly if HFO or TR have asked them to send this letter to you, and why.

 

PM me with your location so I can muster resources. This is war!

 

Must change my avatar to Cpt Mainwaring...

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

mel

 

I think DB's suggestion about contacting M&S is a very good one. You should wrie to the Compliance Officer and ask why they are flouting the FSA rules about what they should put on their letters.

 

Contary to popular belief, M&S Money is not part of the store. It is part of HSBC. See the following form its web site

"

Marks & Spencer Money and Your M&S are trading names of Marks & Spencer Financial Services plc.

Registered in England No: 1772585. Registered Office: Kings Meadow, Chester CH99 9FB. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority. A wholly owned subsidiary of HSBC Bank plc."

 

As a regulated firm, it has to disclose who it is and the fact that it regulated by the FSA. Unless you have been very clever with PhotoShop, it looks like this is a blank letterhead with just the M&SMoney logo that someone has printed out and then sent unsigned. Now where have I seen that type of behaviour before????

Arrow Global/MBNA - Discontinued and paid costs

HFO/Morgan Stanley (Barclays) - Discontinued and paid costs

HSBC - Discontinued and paid costs

Nationwide - Ran for cover of stay pending OFT case 3 yrs ago

RBS/Mint - Nothing for 4 yrs after S78 request

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Docman

 

I have received letters from M&SMoney with just that logo on, so it could well be genuine. However I agree with you that mel should contact M&S to find out why they would send that letter out of the blue.

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks to me as though TR/HFO are appealing on the grounds that the letter from M&S was mistaken, and that the assignation was to HFO Capital.

 

Even if we accept that as fact, the deed CP2 which assigns all of HFOC's current and future purchased debt to HFO Services kills them dead in the water, as HFOC is the claimant.

 

Then if they want to change the name of the claimant, then that would prove they have lied in their witness statement.

 

Which brings us neatly to 'vexatious litigation'.

 

They cannot win.

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

mel

 

I think DB's suggestion about contacting M&S is a very good one. You should wrie to the Compliance Officer and ask why they are flouting the FSA rules about what they should put on their letters.

 

Contary to popular belief, M&S Money is not part of the store. It is part of HSBC. See the following form its web site

"

Marks & Spencer Money and Your M&S are trading names of Marks & Spencer Financial Services plc.

Registered in England No: 1772585. Registered Office: Kings Meadow, Chester CH99 9FB. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority. A wholly owned subsidiary of HSBC Bank plc."

 

As a regulated firm, it has to disclose who it is and the fact that it regulated by the FSA. Unless you have been very clever with PhotoShop, it looks like this is a blank letterhead with just the M&SMoney logo that someone has printed out and then sent unsigned. Now where have I seen that type of behaviour before????

hi doc,

i did think it was an odd letter, but the envelope has the address of kings meadow on the back, so i assume this is definately from m and s.

am in the process of sorting out a call to M and S....;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

'vexatious litigation'

yes absolutely you need to also writeto mr turnbum personally and remind him that you shall make a case against him for 'vexatious litigation' this will put him in front of the judge with nowhere to turn no excuses and also effect his reliability to trade honestly it will also effect his registration with the law society and his credibility will be finnished completely in doing this i think alice turnbum will have to think seriously about going forward with possible forged documents this is an imprisonable offence there is no excuse for this but if it is the case he is ultimately responsible since he was made aware of this from the start,go for it mum and a very merry xmas to all and a really happy new year

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by patrickq1 are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...