HFC charges reclaim **WON** now wetcloths chasing balance

[moneydragon]

hi Karne

 

thanks for getting back, are you sitting comfortably, then I will begin.

 

Back in 2004 I found that due to a change in my personal circumstances I could no longer manage my outgoings so I set up a payment plan via payplan and have continued to pay ever since.

 

At the begining of Jan when I felt stronger and able to take these people on, I sent a cca to both Wescots and HFC. Westcots did not reply however on 8.1.07 HFC sent me a statement and it was clear by this that Westcots are only collecting on behalf of HFC.

 

I noticed that on 2.6.04 at the same time I was setting up a payment plan HFC had added a £50 'legal charges' to my knowledge there has never been any legal action taken against me. definitely no ccj's, though I cant be sure they may of added a default against me.

 

On 10.1.07 I sent a letter requesting them to justify the 'legal charges'and this was their reply:

 

Thank you for your letter dated 31.1.07, regarding the charges applied to your account. I am aware you are concerned with the default charges, which have been debited during the history of your account. I have taken this opportunity to personally investigate the background to your complaint and would like to clarify our position as follows:-

 

The OFT has been investigating the level of default charges in respect of the credit card industry. However, your account does not relate to a credit card agreement and therefore we do not accept that it is covered by the OFT's investigation or the announcement it made on 5.4.06.

 

Default charges are made if customers do not make the require minimum payment by the payment due date, or if a payment to their account is returned unpaid. We beleive that the fees imposed by HFC Bank are fair and reasonable and the circumstances when they apply are set out in the terms and conditions of the account.

 

On 31.1.07 1st LBA was sent to HFC and this was their reply:

Thank you for your letter dated 31 January 2007, regarding the charges applied to your account. I am aware you are concerned with the default charges, which have been debited during the history of your account. I have taken this opportunity to personally investigate the background to your complaint and would like to clarify our positionas follows:

The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has been investigating the level of default charges in respect of the Credit Card industry. However, your account does not relate to a credit card agreement and therefore we do not accept that it is covered by the OFT's investigation or the announcement it made on 5 April 2006.

 

Default charges are made if customers do not make the required minimum payment by the payment due date, or if a payment to their account is returned unpaid. We beleive that the fee imposed by HFC Bank are fair and reasonable and the circumstances when they apply are set out in the terms and conditions of the account.

 

I would like to thank you for taking the time to bring this matter to my attention. I regret that we are not prepared to make any refund of default charges.

16.2.07 2nd LBA was sent to HFC, this was their reply:

Having given careful consideration to all of the information available, I write to advise that I am unable to uphold your complaint and have summarised below the basis on which I have made the decision.

 

The above account financed a purchase made at Currys Digital, Little Stanley for #338.49 during November .

 

Your initial letter was received in our office on 6.2.2007, in which you requested a refund of the charges on the above account.

 

Mrs Pally Kaur from our Executive Complaints Dept responded to yor letter on 7.2.07, advising that we were not prepared to offer any refund of charges. In addition the account was not covered by the Office of Fair Trading(OFT) direction, as this related to credit card accounts only and not personal loans.

 

We acknowledge receipt of your letter dated ,in which you express your continual dissatisfaction and reiterated a refund of #65 in relation to the default charges applied to your account.

It is regrettable you feel we have not conducted ourselves lawfully, by charging you for the administration of your account when payment is not received by the due date. The OFT recommends a level of #12.00 as a fair reflection of the actual loss, our default charges are 15.00 and we are therefore confident that they do reflect our actual costs incurred when handling late or missing payment. We beleive our administration charges to be fair and lawful as specified in your terms and conditions. Having reviewed your account I am unable to agree with your comment and therefore we are unable to offer any refund or compensation blah blah

11.3.07 submitted claim via MCOL. Their defence is as above.

I would like to state that HFC have never justified the charge and they certainly have not let me have a list of their charges.

Hope you can help

Regards. J:)

 

 

 

[moneydragon]

Whoops

 

I forgot to mention yes, I do have the copies of all letters sent and received.

 

When I wrote to them I used the templates off this site.

 

Regards

 

J:)

[Scooby_Doo2]

Hi moneydragon

 

If the £50 charge on your account is listed as "Legal Fees", this means they have issued a default notice under Section 87(1) of the CCA. I used to work for HFC, so I know how the operate.

 

The default notice itself is usually issued by the Collections Dept in Edmund Street, Birmingham. All that actually happens is an operator requests the letter and £50 is charged to your account. I don't see any reason why you cannot contest this under the Unfair Terms regulations as it certainly doesn't cost £50 to send a letter which is automatically produced with a computer generated signature.

 

This is a penalty charge in my opinion, as at this stage no legal action has been taken and no legal costs incurred. HFC would have to prove their costs and that they are reasonable. For the sake of £50, I'm surprised they are dragging this out.

 

Still, if you took your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service (you'd need their Final Response first), it'll cost them £360 for the case fee alone, regardless of who wins the argument.

 

I also think there has been some confusion on their part between default charges and a default notice. Their letters (which are generic for everyone who complains about fees) refer to default charges, not the charge for a default notice. The default charges they are referring to are late payment charges.

 

Hope this helps.

[moneydragon]

Thanks scooby that was really helpful. Just a little confused of where to go from here!

 

When you say I "need their final response first" is this before I attend the case management conference?

 

Reagrds J

[Karne]

Excellent Scooby thanks mate.

 

Money you dont need worry about the FOS as you are already in the court system.

 

You need to show that the charge isnt in fact a legal fee and demonstrate it is a penalty for defaulting.

 

Should be too difficult as they havent actually taken any legal action against you.

 

Sounds to me like they have bunged your genuine enquiry about a particular charge with the bank charge reclaim fees letter and sent the standard templates back....very shoddy.

 

I'd carry on and go to the CMC, they may pay up before hand.

 

The CMC is just to decide how to take the case forwards, what issues are involved etc.

 

Does seem odd they are going to court for £50.

[Scooby_Doo2]

Yeah, if you're in the court system, continue with that.

 

The FOS is just another avenue anyone can take if a regulated firm cannot resolve a complaint to your satisfaction. There are rules which the firms have to adhere to (they are set out in DISP of the FSA Handbook - it's a tough read, believe me!).

 

The final response is basically the firms final word on the matter and it is the end of their complaints process. It's only when you have reached this (or if the firm fails to issue any response within 8 weeks of the first complaint) that you can take your case to the FOS. The FOS have to give the firm the opportunity to resolve it first, then they'll adjudicate.

 

As Karne says, you're already in the court system so I would stick with that process.

[moneydragon]

Thanks Karne & Scooby

J:)

[moneydragon]

Hi everyone

 

My CMC is due on 31.7.07 and I have been preparing my arguement. Can someone please look over this and advise if I am on the right track as I am getting nervous now and dont want to make any stupid mistakes:

 

My claim is that the bank's charges are a disproportionate penalty and therefore unenforceable as they are contrary to common law. Further, as a disproportionate penalty they are invalid under the Unfair (Contracts) Terms Act 1977 s.4 and under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Para.8 and sch.2 (1) (e). In the event that the charges are not a penalty then they are unreasonable within the meaning of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 s.15.

 

I have repeatedly asked HFC to justify their charges but they have declined to do so. There has never been any legal action taken against me no ccj’s etc. I believe the £50 charge on my account is listed as "Legal Fees", which means HFC have issued a default notice under Section 87(1) of the CCA. The default notice itself is was issued by the Collections Dept in Edmund Street, Birmingham. I also believe that all actually happens is an operator requests the letter and £50 is charged to my account.

 

No legal action has been taken and no legal costs incurred. I have asked HFC to prove their costs and that they are reasonable. Therefore being charged £50 for the same ‘service’ is unlawful.

 

I am claiming i. the return of the amounts debited in respect of charges in the sum of £50

Thanks for all your help it is much appreciated

 

 

 

[moneydragon]

Hi

 

OH just phoned to let me know that a letter from HFC solicitors has arrived offering me full settlement. Post full details after I have read the contents.

 

success:D

[moneydragon]

hi all

 

Just an update, with the offer came conditions ie, I was to keep it strictly private and that they would inform the courts. I duly crossed this all out and said I would inform the court when payment had cleared.

 

So today in the post was full settlement only a small amount but hey it's a winner and whats more they wont shut me up!!!

 

:D :D

[hagenuk]

Congratulations, well done!

[moneydragon]

Hi

 

Back in 2001 I purchased an item through Dixons and had a credit agreement with HFC. This was fine until circumstances changed and since 2005 I have paid Wescots via payplan.

 

HFC charged me £50 legal fees which I have successfully got back. After this I turned my attentions to Westcots as HFC say that Westcott own it but on a recent statement from HFC the money I pay Westcott monthly is showing on the statement from HFC so I think Westcotts dont own but are collecting for HFC.

 

My next step was to CCA Westcott to see if they have the right to collect and more importantly a statement as I have no idea what is outstanding. Their time for default runs out on Monday.

 

However through my letter box today dropped a notification from royal mail that a special delivery item for me had not enough postage to the amount of £5.30 and was I prepared to pay to get this item. I spoke with royal mail and they said that the sender had just stuck a special delivery label on the envelope did not complete the sender details and put it in the post box. The man could see through the envelope that it was from HFC Bank. What a cheek, I instructed royal mail to send it back for them to resend it at the correct postage rate.

 

Is this a new tatic or is this someone trying to be clever or just plain stupid!! I think the latter.

 

Anyway the clock carrys on ticking and Monday Westcotts are in default.

[moneydragon]

Can someone please help.

 

Westcot have failed to reply to my cca request but, today I received from HFC a copy of my cca also included was a statement. However the statement does not agree with the one that they sent me in January.

 

In January 2007 HFC show as continually receiving monthly payments as agreed with my DMP which is payable to Wescot however the statement HFC sent today shows that 2004 it was passed to Wescot and that HFC have received nothing- hope this makes sense.

 

I am totally confused as to what my next step is:confused:

[clutchingatstraws]

Is the CCA compliant?

[moneydragon]

Is the CCA compliant?

Hi Clutingatstraws

 

No, it was a copy of my credit agreement.

 

I am just totally confused who owns this and if Westcots can leagally collect

[clutchingatstraws]

Can you post up your credit agreement so you can get an opinion on it. Make sure all personal stuff is blanked out.

[moneydragon]

Can you post up your credit agreement so you can get an opinion on it. Make sure all personal stuff is blanked out.

 

Yes, I will have to do it over the weekend as my other half has to re install the scanner.

 

Speak with you soon:)

[clutchingatstraws]

Have you stopped payments?

[moneydragon]

Have you stopped payments?

Hiya Clutingatstraws

 

I am continuing to pay Westcots via payplan.

 

I have no issue with the credit agreement that HFC sent and would prefer to settle them though they have failed to send any documentation that it was sold/passed on.

 

As Westcots have just simply ignored my request, I dont even know what the balance is and if they have added anything.

 

Am I now right in thinking that I can stop paying Westcots and settle with HFC:confused:

[moneydragon]

I sent cca to HFC and Wescot who are currently collecting payments. HFC have complied and I have no issue with them. However Wescots have just ignored my request.

 

Sorry to sound thick here but do I take it that as Wescots are now in dispute I can stop paying them? They never send statement and I fear they may have added charges.

 

Can anyone please answer my query?

[moneydragon]

Hi

 

I have been sorting out my finances for some time now. Back in 2007 I sent a cca request to HFC which they did not comply with. They inturn forwarded this onto 1st Credit who I also sent a cca to.

 

Checking my credit file I noticed that HFC and !st Credit had entered defaults, when I questioned this with Experian HFC removed their default however 1ST Credit insist that their entry is correct and Experian refuse to remove.

 

Can someone please advise me what my next step is.

 

md:cry:

[exit3]

Hi

 

I have been sorting out my finances for some time now. Back in 2007 I sent a cca request to HFC which they did not comply with. They inturn forwarded this onto 1st Credit who I also sent a cca to.

 

Checking my credit file I noticed that HFC and !st Credit had entered defaults, when I questioned this with Experian HFC removed their default however 1ST Credit insist that their entry is correct and Experian refuse to remove.

 

Can someone please advise me what my next step is.

 

md:cry:

sue them for cosequential loss:!:

[moneydragon]

Thanks exit3

 

I have told them that I will take this to court if I have to. But I am unsure of the process to follow.

 

Do I have to send a LBA?

 

md

[moneydragon]

Hi

 

I sent the following e-mail to experian:

 

In reply to your correspondence I demand that you check the defaulter

had the correct paperwork to process my data and I demand the default

is removed as Ist Credit DO NOT HOLD or able to produce a valid credit

agreement which was a leagl request under s78 of the CCA7. As such if

the creditor is unable to produce then they leaglly are not able to

produce information about me under the data protection act.

 

I am prepared to start court action if you cannot provide proof ,that

they have done all they can to make sure that 1st Credit's information

is accurate.

 

I also request that this account remains in dispute until both

Experian and !st Credit prove that data is correct.

md:mad:

[moneydragon]

And today I got the following reply from them:

 

As requested, the Notice of Dispute will remain attached to this entry until I receive further instructions from you.

 

I would like to explain to you in full the processes we have in place when an individual queries the accuracy of an entry recorded on their credit report.

 

Under Section 159 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, you have the right to query information on your credit report that you believe to be inaccurate, once you have received a copy of your report.

 

You may wish to refer to the relevant legislation below that outlines the process we adhere to when dealing with disputed information.

 

CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974

 

159 Correction of wrong information

(1) Any individual (the ?objector?) given-

(a) information under section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998 by a credit reference agency, or

(b) information under section 158,

who considers that an entry in his file is incorrect, and that if it is not corrected he is likely to be prejudiced, may give notice to the agency requiring it either to remove the entry from the file or amend it.

(2) Within 28 days after receiving a notice under subsection (1), the agency shall by notice inform the objector that it has-

(a) removed the entry from the file, or

(b) amended the entry, or

© taken no action,

and if the notice states that the agency has amended the entry it shall include a copy of the file so far as it comprises the amended entry.

 

I also draw your attention to the fourth Data Protection Principle, which states that:

 

Personal data shall be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date.

 

Within Schedule 1, Part II (Interpretation of the Data Protection Principles) of the Data Protection Act 1998 it is explained that, as a credit reference agency, we are not considered to have breached the Act by querying the disputed information and adding a Notice of Dispute statement.

 

7. The fourth principle is not to be regarded as being contravened by reason of any inaccuracy in personal data which accurately record information obtained by the data controller from the data subject or a third party in a case where-

(a) having regard to the purpose or purposes for which the data were obtained and further processed, the data controller has taken reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy of the data, and

(b) if the data subject has notified the data controller of the data subject's view that the data are inaccurate, the data indicate that fact.

 

Our regulator considers our action to query disputed information with the data provider as taking additional steps to confirm the accuracy of the entry and by adding a statement to this effect to your report we are recording your viewpoint that the entry is inaccurate.

 

Therefore, we were choosing to take no action with regards to your initial request to remove this information from your report. Should you wish to verify this you can contact our regulator at the following address:

 

The Information Commissioner's Office: Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, SK9 5AF

 

In view of this, I am of the opinion that we have acted correctly throughout this matter and in accordance with the relevant legislation. I remind you that under the terms of the Data Protection Act 1998, each lender that supplies us with information is obligated to ensure that the data is accurate and kept up to date.

 

I hope this explains why we cannot remove data from your report, especially when the company concerned has confirmed it to be accurate or has not authorised us to make any amendments, as in your case.

 

Furthermore, as we also have a responsibility to enable lenders to make informed lending decisions, I am sure that you can appreciate why we cannot amend information simply because the individual concerned claims that the data is incorrect.

 

If we operated in this way, any individual could claim that all the adverse information on their report was inaccurate purely as a means of improving their credit report. This would put our clients at risk of people potentially obtaining finance that otherwise would not be offered to them.

 

Because of this, if a consumer disputes information on their report we query this with the data provider. The only instances where we would remove information without direct authorisation from the data provider is if a Court Order is provided that specifically states that an entry should be deleted or a ruling is made from a recognised regulatory body.

 

If you are unhappy with the outcome of the queries that we raised on your behalf, then I suggest that you take up this matter with the Information Commissioner's Office.

I am now awaiting 1st Credit's reply and I will then be submitting my complaint to the OFT whom I beleive are looking into 1st Credit.

md