Jump to content

DG dirty tricks? ****WON****


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5637 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

well i am absolutely gobsmacked!

with our AQ deadline looming (tomorrow, 24th), we received an offer from DG on the 18th, for about 2/3 of the claim. the only unusual thing was that they have included a paragraph stating that they believe we cannot claim further back than six yrs from the date of the issue of our court claim (7th Dec), under the statute of limitations.

i decided to give them a call as the AQ deadline was so close (wish id recorded it all!!), and the outcome was that they made an offer of the full amount. i said that i was quite happy to accept, but wasnt willing to compromise the AQ deadline, so would appreciate paperwork to that effect before the 24th; i was assured that this would not be a problem and that i would have an offer for the full amount in writing by the 24th.

nothing in the post again this morning, so i telephoned the woman i had spoken to at DG last thursday. it appears that they have rescinded the verbal offer as they believe their arguement about statute of limitations is valid, and 'oh dear, didnt you get our letter yet?'.

happily, i had all the AQ paperwork ready to go and will drop it off at the court tomorrow. i am considering including a copy of their offer and a covering letter explaining the telephone shenanigans to the court, or is that a step too far?

this really did feel like a dirty little trick tho. i know sharkie has had this statute of limitations angle pulled on him, is there anyone else?


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

have just done the maths, and the offer they made was for all charges (with interest) from 7th Dec 2000.

so they really are serious about this statute of limitations arguement, and that it should run from the date of the claim being issued with MCOL.

surely the S of L runs from (at least) the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)? that was my interpretation anyway.

does anybody think that this argument will hold water?

surely this will get laughed out of court?


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Liz,

I know BONG is claiming back 13 years worth of unfair charges and interest so, I would have thought they're only clutching at straws. Or maybe they forgot to send the revised paperwork due to the amount of claims they are dealing with and this phone call today was their way of covering this up.

Link to post
Share on other sites



Dropped mine off at the court today, don't know what to say, this six year thing is hard, I can't find anything that states when it starts or finishes exactly. I have been using the small claims court for years but have never come up against it.

The problem is if you have to adjust the six year spread to fit with your claim, then your original approach, and subsequent LBA and then MCOL will not match, it has to run from the original approach, "that is what you are asking for" a six year spread from that date, if however, you decide to add current data then your six year spread will move.

My and your accounts were closed therefore we are unlikely to extend ours, we are claiming money owed to us over " a six year period".

We are expecting a not very spectacular offer tommorrow.




Link to post
Share on other sites

hey sharkie,

dont give up! theres lots of stuff on the statute of limitations, have a look at this website: Part 3

lots of good stuff there.

just means that we need to bone up on that now i guess.

perhaps they are just clutching at straws as gordylar suggests :rolleyes:

i just really dont see what they hope to gain by this interpretation of the SoL


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

i have to say that this waiting game is only made bearable by the wonderful people on this forum...sometimes i feel that im living in an up-market soap opera.

well, we filed our AQ on the 24th jan and sat back to wait. phoned the courts on the 2nd feb, to be told that the papers were with the judge but it didnt look like the other side had filed AQ...this caused us a frisson of glee :rolleyes:

this morning we received a 'general form of judgment or order':


upon considering the court file

The Defendant having failed to file the allocation questionnaire as directed, IT IS ORDERED that unless the defendant files the allocation questionnaire by 4pm on 13 Feb 2007 the Defence and any Part 20 counterclaim will be struck out and judgement entered for the Claimant.


this has certainly raised the adrenaline levels, and clearly there is nothing to do but wait. while i cant help but hope they miss the deadline, i am fairly confident that they will probably fax AQ to court at the very last minute.

whichever happens, the prompt reply by the judge has been something of a relief having read horror stories on this forum of Court admin staff suffering under a backlog and judgements for failed deadlines taking weeks to sort out..at least it doesnt look like we shall have that problem.


Link to post
Share on other sites

i just hope in your case that they can't get their aq in on time and you can press that button!!

good luck and fingers crossed


If i've been helpful in any way....then tip my scales over there!

Link to post
Share on other sites

you're probably way ahead of me, but in case - have a read of this thread:

gpm vs HSBC bank - Their Defence Struck Out (multipage.gif1 2)


here's a repeat of post 21 by hagenuk

you must enter a Judgement in Default as the defence has been struck out. To enter Judgment in Default you will need to obtain a Form from the court, this is known as a "Request for Judgment" Form.


The form you need is an N225, here http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/H...forms_id =465


Complete this and file it with the court where you filed your claim



i'm thinking this is the form you will need now - you can download it by clicking on above, it is a very simple form - two ticks and a couple of totals and that's it. but i'd ring the court to see if that is the next step - i'd have it ready to submit (if that's next step) at 9am 14 Feb.


i thought gpm was the frontrunner in aq's not being filed but i think you are ahead of them. very interested to know what comes next, keep in touch - and don't be surprised to get 1) no response from dg (as that would mean they have to lay out their wares and the bank is not prepared to do that, 2) make a full offer at anytime (be sure to get your aq fee back), or 3) quietly make a deposit into your account without fanfare.


just hope you get your money very, very soon! let us know.

Link to post
Share on other sites



Just spotted this thread - the title kind of appealed to my warped sense of humour.


I am in a large spat with DG at present, and SOLA forms a first principle of my claim - I have just been given a cracking angle to use for this.


I'm offline now until tomorrow, but will pick up in greater detail, and PM you then...in the meantime you should check my Spiceskull and Phoenix v HSBC threads to get a heads up of where I am at the moment.



Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.


All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for that Lateralus,

it was in fact GPMs thread where i read about the understaffing problems...so close as well, very frustrating!

just looked at form n225 and agree that it all looks very straightforward. thanks for the tip too, i shall have it ready to deliver to court first thing on the 15th :) i hadnt thought that far ahead yet, cant quite believe they wont slide in under the wire i guess.

they cant actually just make a deposit as the account was closed 2 years ago, tho that hasnt stopped them from sending their metropolitan rottweilers (DCA) after us for £40 that wasnt owed! we have been harrassed by them for the last 2 years and are in no mood to let them get away with a penny!

hi Phoenix, have been reading ur thread (s) with great interest, and not a little admiration (& a few chuckles), i shall look forward to hearing your cunning plan :)

shall certainly keep everyone updated,



Link to post
Share on other sites

DG are very VERY dirty.... I wrote to the chairman of HSBC a while back as I refuse to deal with DG anymore after they produced dodgy documents. I am now dealing direct with the legal dept at HSBC Towers in Canada Square...

I have just given HSBC last chance to sort the matter out before... well before very serious consequences... I cannot say too much more at the moment, obviously, but will do so in due course if they don't comply with my wishes.


(dave/bankfodder: I will happily fax one of you proof of the dodgy documents if need be, so please don't remove my post as being "potentially libelous"!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you no longer wish to deal with DG Solicitors, write to this man:


Keith Ford

Head of Legal

HSBC Bank plc

Level 42

8 Canada Square


E14 5HQ


tel 020 7991 7154

fax 020 7991 4607



State that you are no longer prepared to deal with DG solicitors (for whatever your particular reason is... mine is that they refused to answer my questions and also were producing documents that appeared to be false)


Keith Ford will probably put the matter to his deputy, Duncan Hamilton, to deal with.


Make sure you send all future letters to Canada Square address rather than the Birmingham address which is for DG solicitors.


If the Head of Legal starts getting enough letters of complaint about their in-house solicitors, they might start taking some notice... ;)


Hope that helps!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever they do whatever they say they will not take it into court because they are as unsure of the law as we are and if they loose it sets a legal president that they will have to appeal against unless they want to loose every time. The ultimate appeal used to be the House of Lords under English law (may be Brussels now but no cheaper) and it costs millions to take a case through the various courts until it reaches the house of lords for the law lords make a final ruling.


Even for the HSBC taking a case to the House of Lords would be expensive. As for us well there is always legal aid and I think judging the level of feeling in this forum if one of us did manage to get any of the banks into a court room a fighting fund would soon appear.


So stick to your plan whatever your misgivings because they have misgivings too, the reason there is no written basis for your claims is because the Banks have backed down at the last minute and paid or feigned incompetence and paid... the operative word here is paid .

Link to post
Share on other sites

rats! they filed.

i know we were expecting them to, but couldnt help nurturing the flame of hope that they would miss it.

the deadline ordered by the judge ended yesterday at 4, so i waited til this morning to call the court. it seems they filed their AQ last wednesday tho (only 2 weeks late!) and we have heard nothing. do DG not send out copies of their AQ?

oh well, back to the waiting game.

happy valentines all


Link to post
Share on other sites

liz, ok, so now it's back to bugging them - this is the wait for the court to send more info but also means closer to court date, so dg should be keen to make an offer - they don't want to see the inside of the court.

i'd ring tomorrow and say something like: "i see you finally filed your aq, although i haven't yet seen a copy of it, can you tell me where we are on settling my claim?" it's time to bug them some more - they'll want to offer soon - keep on them. here's some numbers:

0121 455 2111 (Debbie)

0121 455 2701 (Rachel)

0121 455 2196 (Kate)

0121 455 2206 (Alan)

Fax 0121 455 2150

rachel and kate are nicer to talk to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for the numbers Lateralus, am working my way through them, leaving messages to ask where my 'courtesy' copy is :rolleyes:

i did have a giggle at the court :rolleyes: this morning tho! while i was there for something else, i asked about the status of the case, i could hear the clerks laughing away, and it turns out that the judge has allocated to small claims, standard disclosure :( , but get this.....he has allocated 1 (yes one) minute for the case!!!

seems the judge is getting a bit brassed off with all the banks making us go this far, he expects them to settle.


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi steve, not sure when its going to be, the judge had only just passed it over to the clerk to give the date, but i was told it would prob wont be til april now. i seem to recall yours is mid-april? i wonder how close our dates will be.

managed to talk to kate at DG, she was quite snippy :eek: told me that they dont send out copies of their AQ, and that the court would probably send a copy. time to start faxing and e-mailing schedules of charges, pump up the pressure


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, that tells us then - doesn't it - they don't send copies of their aq - i'm going to stop advising people to send them one then, cheeky beggars.



LOOK AT POST 21 - that will give you a laugh!!!!!!


liz, did you do the draft direction?

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi Lattie,

yes i did send the draft directions.

i also sent a copy of their offer letter with the SoL argument, my accompanying letter pointed out that their offer represented a full offer if the charges made before 7th dec 2000 were to be judged statute barred- we filed mcol on the 7th dec, which is when they argue the SoL runs from.

i respectfully suggested to the court that as they accepted the claim in principle, notwithstanding the SoL, then it constituted no reasonable grounds for defence, was a further abuse of process, and further reason to strike out the defence 8)

i know that strictly speaking, one isn't supposed to use 'without prejudice' correspondence in the court, but the AQ isnt, strictly speaking, court :rolleyes: is it?

as to not sending copies of AQ...we still want to do that dont we? keep the pressure up etc. tho i guess it does give them a heads up as to what we are doing, hmmmm


Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...