Nettyg v Hsbc ***WON***

[lateralus]

andy 007 - full offer!

[lateralus]

i prefer the life affirming corrie! (murdering girlfriend, abandoned baby, bi-sexual boyfriends, girls preggers at 13, cilla pretending to have cancer to raise enough money to swim with dolphins) and there's liam - he's hunky! there's never any hunky guys on eastenders - either bad, sad, or bald! - no offense, crusher!

[lateralus]

i know you are!

[lateralus]

yep, right again!

[lateralus]

hope you tweaked that rejecting letter - none of the 4 is exactly right for you - but i'm sure you can manage to get it to say what you want. rundll, is yours 4mar as well?

[lateralus]

netty,

been meaning to put this for you - i know you have it - just so it's handy. in case you want to get your aq in order this weekend- same old stuff, just cut a pasted for you to have to hand:

 

Allocation Questionnaires - A guide to completion

this is your step by step completion guide -. and here is:New strategy for Allocation Questionaires

and here is how to use it:

for section g on the aq, use the wording on post #3 of new strategy link,

and then attach draft order for directions - use wording on post #2 of new strategy link making sure to add your name and court claim number to all pages. simple as that. just follow the steps with these two minor additions. the draft order is just asking the judge to order both parties to lay out their wares within 14 days of him ordering it - so it shortens the length of the time to a court date - and as dg/hsbc/all banks don't want to do it - they will pay up by offer or just not file their aq in which case you also win.

 

let me know if you hear anything. did you send dg a valentine?

[lateralus]

i know - i saw it! go for it - the more the merrier - as i said in noel's - add that next paragraph about the two pronged approach - maybe even from noel's as i've expanded on my theory about why not to file the aq too early - it may be totally wrong - but in the absence of another theory i will keep preaching it - besides - keeps people happy doing something after the do nothing previous 28 days. i should have known you'd have it all sorted - just didn't want you thinking i'd left you out when i'm sending it to all an sundry. did you see lizvp - dirty tricks thread - her post about the judge alloting 1 minute for the claim - what a laugh - i hope crusher saw it.

[lateralus]

steal away...........

and i thought you were being sarcastic - who's dg?

 

see you really are catching on - i couldn't figure out what sol was (but didn't really think is was double glazing!).

 

who's dg?????????????????????????ha-bloody-ha

[lateralus]

i know what you mean - soon as someone comes off it in our house i rush to sit down - then have to go when uni work or o/h's cyber stuff needs to be done. i hardly get a look in - even now - number 2 son is saying "let me know when you're off" which is coded talk for i need messenger now!

[lateralus]

messenger, you tube, my space - it's still rock and roll to me!

can't go out - friday is my night in - o/h night out - watching rugby at the pub. my night out is sat. even then - he goes out first to watch rugby at 6 and i come out at 8. i don't mind, when he's watching rugby, i can have the puter.

[lateralus]

allow me: no.

[lateralus]

sometimes i feel quite sorry for poor old colin!

 

i've always considered myself more of a backing singer - all that ooo,wada,bop,ram-a-lam-a,ding,dong sort of stuff - sounds good in the bath!

[lateralus]

1. Do you mean section H?

2. Enter the total value of your claim in the space provided - This should include all interest but not costs.

3. barring anybody saying anything else i'd put "Claimant/customer"

4. this? from step by step instruc.

You may wish to add reasons why the case is more suitable for Small Claims Track if your claim value exceeds £5,000 or provide reasoning why the Judge should make ‘directions’ that have been listed in Section F.

 

You might wish to include text similar to the following;

So, Nets -I'd put this:

 

I am respectfully requesting that my claim be allocated to the small claims track. This issue is not a complicated one; it is an issue of fact and not of law. The issue is only whether the money levied by the Defendant in respect of its customer’s contractual breaches exceed their actual costs incurred. I am happy to pay their actual costs and I am surprised the Defendant did not counterclaim for these, because I would have paid them without argument.

 

However, the continuing problem is (in common with the 100s of other cases currently being brought by other bank customers) that the banks refuse to reveal the details of their penalty-charging regime. As the banks have a fiduciary duty towards their customers, they have a duty to deal straightforwardly and in utmost good faith.

 

i'm looking at the N150, the step by step instructions and your letter - so - it's easier - refer to the N150 letter where you have questions and i'll try to help out.

lots of time - we'll get it.

[lateralus]

what do you mean the right one - did you claim any overdraft interest?

which s/s did you use?

i'm looking up the other stuff.

[lateralus]

1. ok, i see the question and lizvp says yes, we should be the better person and send it to them and bong also said it is the done thing so, yes, you are going to send dg a copy so tick yes.

2. i see section D case management - what amount of the claim is in dispute and the step by steps guide Enter the total value of your claim in the space provided - This should include all interest but not costs.

where else does it ask?

3.ok

4.which section?

take it

 

from the top: section A - tick no

section B - TICK YESand put in your local court and state that since you, as a private individual, are claiming against a company who carries on business in this location, then the case should be heard locally to you.

section C - TICK in part 2 - Yes if you have included a spreadsheet of charges etc, NO if you have not.

i see no reason not to send a breakdown - so tick yes in part 2 and send a spreadsheet.

section D - Enter the total value of your claim in the space provided - This should include all interest but not costs.

tick no on applications

for witness - put your name and i think address and then as we said "claimant/customer"

experts: tick no

i' think i would tick the first no and then put N/A in the two boxes.

track: small claims - and netty, i think the bit in blue is just saying that the 5k limit is without interest and court costs (but if it's a little over, try the small claims and give:

 

I am respectfully requesting that my claim be allocated to the small claims track. This issue is not a complicated one; it is an issue of fact and not of law. The issue is only whether the money levied by the Defendant in respect of its customer’s contractual breaches exceed their actual costs incurred. I am happy to pay their actual costs and I am surprised the Defendant did not counterclaim for these, because I would have paid them without argument.

 

However, the continuing problem is (in common with the 100s of other cases currently being brought by other bank customers) that the banks refuse to reveal the details of their penalty-charging regime. As the banks have a fiduciary duty towards their customers, they have a duty to deal straightforwardly and in utmost good faith.

section E: 1 hour and leave other fields blank

fill in the box:Fill out any dates that you would NOT be able to attend a court

section F: tick yes, and then no

and you do the draft direction to attach

 

 

section G: leave blank

section H: answer all - yes, yes, i think i'd give the date you sent dg a breakdown

in big space:

The Claimant proposes the attached draft order for directions, for the courts due consideration. If ordered, the Claimant believes these directions will allow the overriding objective's to be furthered in that they will fully identify the most fundemental issues in dispute (as detailed below), and allow them to be assessed so that this claim may proceed justly and expediently.

 

- The crux upon which this claim rests is the true cost incurred by the Defendent as a result of the contractual breach from which its charges arise. If the Defendent cannot substantiate the cost of each charge as proportionate to its loss incurred, it has charged contractual penalties contrary to the UTCCR 1999 and common law principles established since the early 1900's.

 

- In the event that the Defendents charges were accepted as being a fee for a service (which is denied), examination of its true costs is required to determine whether the price is reasonable as required by the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.

 

As the law relating to contractual penalties is long established, the Claimant believes the outstanding issues to be of fact. Accordingly, the Claimant respectfully requests that the claim be allocated to the small claims track, and estimates that the hearing of the claim should last no longer than one hour.

 

If this doesn't fit in the box, attach to a seperate sheet with your claim number at the top and headed with -

N149/150 Allocation Questionnaire - Section G/H

 

and every page you attach needs your name and claim number at the top.

 

has this helped at all? send specific questions, nets - we'll get there!

[lateralus]

nets'

apparently guido has corrected some of the spelling and grammar mistakes on this, so use this one:

The Claimant proposes the attached draft order for directions, for the courts due consideration. If ordered, the Claimant believes these directions will allow the overriding objectives to be furthered in that they will fully identify the most fundamental issues in dispute (as detailed below), and allow them to be assessed so that this claim may proceed justly and expeditiously.

- The crux upon which this claim rests is the true cost incurred by the Defendant as a result of the contractual breach from which its charges arise. If the Defendant cannot substantiate the cost of each charge as proportionate to its loss incurred, it has charged contractual penalties contrary to the UTCCR 1999 and common law principles established since the early 1900's.

- In the event that the Defendant's charges were accepted as being a fee for a service (which is denied), examination of its true costs is required to determine whether the price is reasonable as required by the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.

As the law relating to contractual penalties is long established, the Claimant believes the outstanding issues to be of fact. Accordingly, the Claimant respectfully requests that the claim be allocated to the small claims track, and estimates that the hearing of the claim should last no longer than one hour.

[lateralus]

any news nets?

[lateralus]

so ok netty, are we back on track - any others check in via pm? i sent bong one for you just now - she'll take a look, too.

the 149 is much more concise - i just about get that one - this is first look i've really had at the 150 so we'll conquer it together.

just carry on as normal until someone tells you otherwise. (i'm hoping in about 3 weeks time we will both look back on today and laugh - but i know it's a bitch right now), - like the time i sent a hard boiled egg with son #1 for the ingredients for a cooking class - (actually he still doesn't laugh at that, but i do!) we'll call this your hard boiled egg!

[lateralus]

go have a bubble bath - that works for me every time!

 

and it's calming to know you can download a zillion copies of it from the aq link if you need them - i've got one of each 149 and 150 now where i can see them instead of dancing back and forth all the time.

we'll get there -

send them another breakdown!!!!!!

[lateralus]

netty - i don't think i'll survive another claim!

 

 

 

 

 

p.s. which s/s did you use this time?

[lateralus]

nets, let me know when you are ready to tackle the 150 again - or maybe you've done it.

i tried copying the bit in blue on post 3 of the new strat. and then pasting it in section h and it fits fine.

also, did you take a look to see if the basic charges - no interest or court fees is under 5K - that'll be your reasoning for it to be in small claims.

it's all do-able, just get it ready and set it aside - you'll feel in control if it's ready to take in. plus you'll be able to help the others, i've got a list going and i'm sure it's not all of them -

these are when the aq's are due;

3/3 beresd,johnnymitch,foss

4/3 yours,rundl

5/3 noel,roosters,gazhodge

forgot when rundl's is - did he tell us?

anyways, i'm sure a few will need some help.

have fun seeing a.w.

[lateralus]

i think you are doing just fine - you've got a complete network of people wishing you well. give it a go when you are ready - every time i look at it it looks easier - you do the same - just keep going back - it will click into place when you get around to it - still plenty of time

 

how about a fax to dg - they might not see it coming!

and maybe, maybe, maybe - dare i say it - 3 day offer bonanza starting tomorrow???????? shoot, it's only tues, isn't it?????

well, day after t omorrow then!

[lateralus]

i suppose we need to find out if an aq is due on a sat or sun when it needs to be in. someone will tell us. 5 of the 8 i mentioned last night are due on sat/sun. have you read it anywhere, netty?

[lateralus]

nobody can say you aren't trying hard, netty. i think with the client is always a good sign - at least it's not being used for toilet paper. maybe the 3 days will be good this week - c & d got an offer today.

[lateralus]

i'd think you put the date you filed the mcol.

 

did you ever look at the 149, netty? it is so much easier.

hope you get it into the small claims - you didn't say - but was the figure without court interest and fees below 5k? i put earlier - that would be your justification for asking for small claims.

 

did you see trevor mcdonald last night? it was another martyn lewis reclaiming charges story. he kept referring to the last one - which is the one i saw and they referred to cag and that's when i joined and started my son's claim - he said over 1 million template letters have been downloaded - hard to believe - but i guess it's just going to get bigger and bigger - i'm glad his is over and done with (unless he goes for the interest on the managed loan). hsbd/dg will surely buckle under the weight of more claims. i see from what some of the threads are saying the claims now apparently get sent from dg to a "new claims review office", so i think they are finally getting organized although i think this new bit seems to put the claims back a couple of weeks - hopefully you are right on the edge (don't jump) of an offer, but it's new territory - i still think you'll see an offer either just before or just after the aq goes in.

 

have a good weekend!