Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello and welcome to CAG.   As you're at the pre-court stage with this, please could you let us have the information requested in the forum sticky? That way we can start to advise on how to deal with your case. Please sit on your hands until the forum guys are able to get here.   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/391121-have-you-received-a-parking-ticket/   Best, HB
    • this is part of the pack Shoosmith sent the entire contents are 54 pages and when merged into pdf it come to 33mb even with the images at 200dpi. The parts I have not posted are the statements from June 2017 to Sep 2020 and a financial means form. Doc 2.pdf
    • "All debtors goods & Chattels belong to us, after all after gaining entry after a Virtual CGA, what's to stop them listing goods as they remove them after their in their mind legal forced entry?"   Yes absolutely.  It is bad enough at the moment, where some bailiffs misrepresent goods being bound as goods being under control, the former not enabling goods to be taken from premises for sale. To be under control a visit must be made of course, even if this amendment is passed. Under the TCE, as you say since 2014, re attendance is permitted by the debtors signed CGA, that is all. Even a previous attendance does not permit it, unless goods are taken under control under part 13(d) of the TCE Schedule 12 and section 20 of the Taking Control of Goods regulations 2013 and the agreement struck. This is in stark contrast to the earlier rules, where re attendance was permitted after the Bailiff had just gained initial access. I am unsure, reading the judgement, that the Master was fully aware of this(in parts).   I consider this, as said earlier to be due to the way section 14 and 16 are written, both parts imply that forced entry can be used, and in neither case, due to the 2014 amendments neither  actually can. The Master referred to the Memorandum and the Beaston report of 2000, but in this respect neither of those generally reliable tomes of knowledge are relevant.
    • did you get a letter of claim and reply pack about 1 month before the issuance of the claimform.?
    • I am just throwing possible issues out there. It's not the caring that would be the stumbling block, but her sleeping over in a property she is renting to you, hence the possible regulation 9 reference.   The only real way to know for sure would be to apply and go from there, but obviously that has potential pit falls, if they refuse the benefit and you need to challenge them, as any appeal could take a long time, before they are heard.
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

PPI HSBC Compensation and Reversed Insurance Payments

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 815 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I am looking for some advice with respect to a PPI refund and compensation in connection with a former Endeaour loan.


I had a compensation refund in 2015 which was based on premiums I had paid from 2002 - 2013. But I did not know if it had been calculated properly because although I had requested that the PPI be cancelled in 2013 all my loan account statements from Endeavour/HSBC and subsequently Sancopia Portfolio showed premium payments .


I then spent 3 years trying to find out how HSBC reached their compensation figure and which premium payments were used for the calculation.


Finally after escalating it to an FCA case I was sent the HSBC spreadsheet for the calculation which did not include any premiums from 2013 - 2015.


HSBC say that the premiums from 2013 - 2015 were reversed and they have sent the FCA a screenshot form their internal systems which show that the premiums were reversed and refunded.


FCA say they are satisfied that 8 of the 15 payments have been reversed.


What I would advice on is whether this is correct if they are still showing on the loan account statement i.e if there is no corresponding reduction of the loan account to reflect these reversals.


As a result of this long running issue, I have the internal HSBC PPI compensation spreadsheet with all formulas. I am more than happy it with the CAG if it can help others succeed with their claims.


Advice would be much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you mean FOS surely?


did you ever sar HFC [endeavour were HFC..HSBC inherited HFC]

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...