Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre action protocol) failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
    • Hi, we are looking to get some opinions on weather or not to bother fighting this PCN. This comes from a very big retail park parking where there are restaurants, hotel, amongst other businesses. The parking is free but I suppose there must be a time limit on it that I am not aware of. We were in the area for around 4 hours. Makes us wonder how they deal with people staying in the hotel as the ANPR is on what appears to be a publicly maintained street (where london buses run) which leads to the different parking areas including the hotel.  1 Date of the infringement 26/05/2024 2 Date on the NTK  31/05/2024 3 Date received 07/06/2024 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?]  YES 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Entry and exit photos however, based on the photographs we are almost sure the photos are taken on public street. This is the location I believe photos are taken from.  https://maps.app.goo.gl/eii8zSmFFhVZDRpbA 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up N/A 7 Who is the parking company? UKPA. UK Parking Administration LTD 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] The Colonnades, Croydon, CR0 4RQ For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. British Parking Association (BPA) Thanks in advance for any assistance.  UKPA PCN The Collonades-redacted.pdf
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 161 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

New strategy for Allocation Questionnaires


BankFodder
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5062 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

If you have used the new strategy, was it successful?  

80 Caggers have voted

  1. 1. If you have used the new strategy, was it successful?

    • Yes - the draft was made into an order
    • No - standard/other directions were ordered


Recommended Posts

Found All the case studies But still can't find the T&C for Clydesdale, that's all i need. What happens if i can't get hold of them. Do i need them or can i find a way to say no matter what the terms of the contract are the charges are excessive and seen as making a profit???

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi

 

Just wandered if you could tell me what a CPR1.1(2) IS?

 

 

CPR 1.1

(1)These Rules are a new procedural code with the overriding objective of enabling the court to deal with cases justly.

(2)Dealing with a case justly includes, so far as is practicable –

(a)ensuring that the parties are on an equal footing;

(b)saving expense;

©dealing with the case in ways which are proportionate –

(i)to the amount of money involved;

(ii)to the importance of the case;

(iii)to the complexity of the issues; and

(iv)to the financial position of each party;

(d)ensuring that it is dealt with expeditiously and fairly; and

(e)allotting to it an appropriate share of the court’s resources, while taking into account the need to allot resources to other cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

See post #1197. :)

 

I think you've mistakenly been given the directions for a completely different claim. Incidentally, I received a defence to my NatWest claim the other day - which bizarrely went into great details about the mechanics and various safety divices fitted to a Travis Perkins cement mixer.:D Nothing to do with bank charges, obviously!

 

 

Gary, can you please help me with this one, I feel I am getting in out of my depth! my thread is DSvABBEY

 

The courts have returned my letter which was hand delivered on Monday with a compliment slip stating that:-

 

"they are standard directions for all Bank Charge Claims. If they do not apply to your claim then you canot file them."

 

This seems unfair that my letter does not seem to be seen by a judge.

 

Is there any forms/application which I can send in with a fee to embody or use to highlight this so that the Judge will review it and if so under what rule!

 

Thanks

DS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi DS,

 

I don't think there is a lot you can do then - just treat them as the standard small claims track directions.

 

You could apply formally on an N244 for the draft to be ordered I suppose, but it'll cost you £35.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They didn't, thank god - I was actually sad enough to check! :D

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Watcing the news last night about the OFT court case it seems that all claims will be put on hold untill the end of this year at least.

Is this correct the oft publication seems to confirm this.

Are we better waiting until the judjement is in before wie continue to litigate. what would be the implications in waiting if a letter before action has been issued and contractual interest applied.

 

Best regards

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Yes thanks Fromthe OFT link on here

The Financial Services Authority has issued a 'waiver' from its complaints handling rules. This action means that until the test case is resolved any bank or building society that applies for the waiver will not be required to handle complaints relating to unauthorised overdraft charges.

 

Which i think pretty much means all.

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Yes thanks Fromthe OFT link on here

The Financial Services Authority has issued a 'waiver' from its complaints handling rules. This action means that until the test case is resolved any bank or building society that applies for the waiver will not be required to handle complaints relating to unauthorised overdraft charges.

 

Which i think pretty much means all.

 

Peter

Not correct.

 

The FSA has "waivered" the banks' internal complaints procedures in respect of bank charges complaints - this also means that any claims going through the FOS will be on hold.

 

Whether County Court claims are stayed or not is entirely a matter for each court - not the banks, the OFT, the FSA, or anyone else for that matter. Those organisations have no bearing or influance on court process. Having said that I suspect that most, if not all, courts will choose to stay claims en-masse - but the claimant is at liberty to challenge any stay.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry i coppied this direct from the link

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

As per above

 

From the OFT information on the court action

 

11. What happens to those wanting to, or in the process of reclaiming charges while the case is going on?

It will be for the courts to decide in relation to claims made to them.

The Financial Services Authority has issued a 'waiver' from its complaints handling rules. This action means that until the test case is resolved any bank or building society that applies for the waiver will not be required to handle complaints relating to unauthorised overdraft charges.

The UTCCRs law is one factor that the Financial Ombudsman Service must take account of when making its decisions. As this action is expected to provide certainty about the law, the Financial Ombudsman Service has decided not to progress complaints about current account charges until the outcome of the legal action is known.

 

Is this information incorrect?

 

Back to my question if i have a claim where i am claiming contractual interest would i not be better waiting rather than have the court register the claim and loose a substantial ammount in what could be an inteim of twelve months

 

Regards

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this information incorrect?

No, it correctly states that its up to the courts what they do with claims.

 

The banks not handling complaints does not extend to those that are already in the court system - by then its out of the banks, or the FSA's, hands

Back to my question if i have a claim where i am claiming contractual interest would i not be better waiting rather than have the court register the claim and loose a substantial ammount in what could be an inteim of twelve months

 

Regards

Peter

A contractual interest claim is no longer valid under mutuality, or fairness, etc - there is a precedent against it on the implied term basis.

 

Aside from that though, how would you lose interest? It will continue to accrue at exactly the same rate whether its in the court system or not. The only thing you could (potentially) lose is the court fee. The advice from CAG is to keep filing claims.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A contractual interest claim is no longer valid under mutuality, or fairness, etc - there is a precedent against it on the implied term basis.

 

 

Hi

I notice on other threads ther are still people applying for contracual interest are al these void.

Not being a regular followeer of this thread i didn't realise and i don't think a lot of other people do either.

When was this precident realised and do you have more details perhals you could link me to the relavant postings.

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

where i am claiming contractual interest

I could wish that Martin b****y Lewis was somewhat more thoughtful with his on-screen pontifications. Last night on one of the news channels he quite chirpily told the interviewer that "Only when all of the banks give all of the charges back to their customers without being asked", would they (the press?) see a smile on his face; absolutely NO mention of the interest already taken!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

hI

Just had a quick google on the above and isn't it true that this ruling applied to bank accounts and not to Credit card agreements in which the terms are not implied but actual.

 

Regards

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

hI

Just had a quick google on the above and isn't it true that this ruling applied to bank accounts and not to Credit card agreements in which the terms are not implied but actual.

 

Regards

Peter

Here's a link - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank-bank-scotland/97691-contractual-interest-precedent-lost.html

 

Yes its true that it won't apply to credit cards - is your claim a credit card one then? If so the test case does not affect it either! :) File your claim as normal.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not correct.

 

The FSA has "waivered" the banks' internal complaints procedures in respect of bank charges complaints - this also means that any claims going through the FOS will be on hold.

 

Whether County Court claims are stayed or not is entirely a matter for each court - not the banks, the OFT, the FSA, or anyone else for that matter. Those organisations have no bearing or influance on court process. Having said that I suspect that most, if not all, courts will choose to stay claims en-masse - but the claimant is at liberty to challenge any stay.

 

Hi I think i was not clear in my query the points in conflict are the one hlighted above and the one highlighted below.

 

11. What happens to those wanting to, or in the process of reclaiming charges while the case is going on?

It will be for the courts to decide in relation to claims made to them.

The Financial Services Authority has issued a 'waiver' from its complaints handling rules. This action means that until the test case is resolved any bank or building society that applies for the waiver will not be required to handle complaints relating to unauthorised overdraft charges.

 

 

Regards

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a link - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank-bank-scotland/97691-contractual-interest-precedent-lost.html

 

Yes its true that it won't apply to credit cards - is your claim a credit card one then? If so the test case does not affect it either! :) File your claim as normal.

Hi

 

Thanks for that

Not a bad thread this

Not as good as the CCA thread but not bad at all;)

 

Regards

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick question about the court bundle and the statement of evidence at the start of this thread.

 

In the SoE in the Murray v lesuireplay it has the date as 2005

 

16. The Claimant will further rely on numerous recorded authorities dating throughout the 20th century up to the most recent case of Murray v Leisureplay [2005] EWCA Civ 963, all of which have upheld and reinforced the principles set down by Lord Dunedin defining contractual penalty clauses and the unenforceability thereof.

 

But in the court bundle it says 2004 like this

 

In the case of Murray v. Leisureplay (2004), Mr Murray was sacked by Leisureplay and he claimed three years' salary as per his contract of employment. The courts decided that this clause was a penalty clause and he was not entitled to this level of damages. Even though the decision was reverted on appeal, the appeal itself drew on and further reinforced the principles of penalty charges.

 

Is this a mistake or should it be like this.

Thanks.

Lloyds settled in full

£4010.02:D

 

Halifax CC settled

£417.00 :D

 

Lloyds PPI

£3672.15 Refunded off loan :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Murray v Leisureplay was 2005.:)

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi just preparing court bundle for HSBC, do I need the first statement of evidence and at the bottom of the letter there documents in support of evidence (pardon me for being a bit dumb) but these bits of evidence are in the statement aren't they and do I have to list these pieces of evidence in support. Very sorry to be a bit dim!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...