Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
  • 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
      • 160 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
  • Recommended Topics

HSBC 25 year mortgage about to end advice needed!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1706 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

  • 2 months later...

Hi there,

 

It has taken HSBC 8 weeks to reply to my complaint (pretty standard with them, they take it to the wire). They phoned and I spoke to the customer service dept.

 

He did apologise for the lack of communication and they way they have handle the case and gave me £150 comp.

 

They will only grant a 12 month extension and tomorrow their mortgage dept will be calling to try and sell me something (changing our mortgage or increase my monthly payments - according to him).

 

However, he did say that if I had my inheritance by the end of the extension, then a further extension, to dispose of the assets, could be arranged presumably with a hefty arrangement fee!

 

My question is - is this the way that banks are supposed to deal with this type of case? Is there anything else we could do or is this the best we can expect as we are having to look after 2 very frail (and in my mothers case terminally ill) parents?

 

If they insist that I have to transfer to a higher payment (difficult to do as my wife has just gone down to part-time so she can look after her v. frail 97 y.o father).

 

Also could you please advise us,

my father-in-law is selling his bungalow in Kent. He has a cash buyer and all the papers are with solicitors so, it is sold subject to contract (fingers crossed). He has already mentioned that he doesn't need this money and he will give some/all to his 2 daughters.

 

However, it will not be more than the inheritance threshold of £650,000 (his + late mother-in-laws combined allowance) so that's not a problem. But we have been warned by a friend that should he get worse and requires say a care home then the council could/would ask for the money back. This would leave us having to raise a mortgage again.

 

BTW he has enough savings/shares/pension to fund 2 years of care home without the need to use the money from the sale of his house. But I know that gifts from parents have a 7 year cut off re. inheritance tax. I assume that's the same for councils to reclaim money for care home costs?

 

anyway thank you in these very challenging times for us.

 

sidley

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi.

 

 

Answering the part of your post about the council claiming back money that's been given away by someone who later needs council funding for their care. Yes they can and I'm not sure there's a time limit. Sorry. They call it deprivation of capital.

 

 

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well at least it’s some progress

Can’t see they can “sell” you

anything, or charge you for a years

extension

Going by your original post, this may

well prove sufficient

Let’s see what they have to say in their call

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there,

 

thanks to oldrouge and honeybee

 

Had the phone call today, it seems they want us to fill in an income/expenditure form before they can discuss the options.

 

I've also done some research about the deprivation of income re care home fees. Helpful website says that in the case of inheritance tax the 7 year rule applies, but in the case of care home fees there is not time limit, so the local authority can go back as far as they like.

 

However, to recover monies they would have to go court and prove deprivation of income was indeed intended. They also say that in the case of gifted money being used to buy a house or pay off a mortgage, then they cannot force you to sell up or get another mortgage. All they can do is put a charging order on your house (presumably via court) so when you sell they can recover money owed.

 

cheers again.

 

sidley

Edited by sidley
forgot to thank people
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

I need further advice on this topic.

 

Update:

 

HSBC only granted us a 1 year extension with a modest increase in monthly payments.

 

My wife's mother died at the end of August last year. We were able to persuade her father to move to a special mobility flat (rented) 1/2 mile away from us.

 

As my wife and her sister have power of attorney they sold his bungalow (E. Sussex) just before Xmas.

He has a full set of marbles but is incredibly frail/ 80% blind (unable to move even around the flat w/out electric wheelchair).

 

After the sale he wanted to give my wife and her sister the bulk of the money from the sale.

When we talked to the solicitor dealing with the sale, she advised us strongly not to do that, as being attorney's you cannot benefit financially from their father's money. This she said, could cause an investigation if they found out and remove you as attorneys as well as having to repay the money.

 

I can understand this if he wasn't able to maker his own decisions (he's as sharp as a tack), but as he put it " I don't need the money - it's no use to me". His income from pensions etc., outways his outgoings considerably.

 

N.B. The family have decided that when he can no longer live semi-independently (he has an army of carers as well as us going in several times a day), he will come to live with us til his death. So, not going into a home.

 

My question is was the solicitor correct? If so,  what do I suggest to my bank, can I ask them for another year extension?

 

cheers to everyone

 

sidley

 

PS.  my mother has moved to my sister's house and is being looked after by her.

Her house is now empty but she refuses any idea of selling as she believes she is going to go back once she's better (there is no hope of that).

Link to post
Share on other sites

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...