Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi everyone, I have an update on my case that I’d like to share with you all.  so after submitting 371 pages in my bundle, a witness statement and skeleton argument for my court case due to take place in Manchester on June 21st I got an email from my litigator stating that hmrc have pulled out and the case is now closed!    this is the body of the letter….. This letter, which is copied to the Appellant, pursuant to Rule 17 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009, the Respondents gives notice to the Tribunal of their intention to not defend the above appeal.   The Respondents respectfully invite the Tribunal to allow the appeal and close its file. In lieu of the above the Respondents would respectfully ask the Tribunal to vacate the hearing scheduled for Friday 21 June 2024. We would accordingly invite the Tribunal to close its file. Obviously this is extremely good news which hasn’t sunk in that after 3 years of fighting it is over.    I do have a further fight on my hands in that the Group Action I had joined with Independent Tax that had been disbanded in November last year and I chose not to continue with them. They are trying to bill me over 5k for the work they did under that Group Action which is ludicrous bearing in mind the whole point in joining was that it would keep the cost to a minimum as it would be shared between us all. They had asked if I wanted to continue to have them represent me on an individual level which I declined, if I hadn’t, goodness knows what they would have been trying to charge me now. 
    • President Ruto says Kenyans pay less tax than citizens in some other African countries.View the full article
    • As PM Sunak really showed his true colours at the D Day Commemorations by doing what? Oh I am the British PM lets just leave early I have better things to do and as he is called out on disrespecting all those veterans that served our country for the freedoms we have today he gives a groveling apology to little to late. He knew about this event for a long time and also knew that this is probably the last D Day Commemoration due to the age of those Veterans who gave so much for there countries freedom. Even on the day of the D Day Commemoration he still could have changed his plans As PM and stayed but choose not to showing such DISRESPECT to those Veterans, those that lost there lives and Families for the Freedoms we have today Being a Veteran myself I have never known a PM to show such disrespect what the hell was he thinking SHAME ON YOU PM SUNAK  
    • Thanks. We'll try to help over the weekend. If the hearing is on 05/07 then it's 90% sure that the deadline for filing your WS is 21/06.
  • Our picks

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

Are HFC Desperate?


121o121
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6215 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

Recommended Posts

Just to put this to rest once and for all, the reason they keep contacting you is because HFC do not accept 'new customers'. They're business id driven through taking existing customers (introduced through our retail partners) and increasing the amount they are indebted to us.

 

For example - you take out a £700 TV retail agreement for curries.

 

Your details are then passed to the nearest branch who solicit you and entice you into a consolidation loan so...

 

You pay off curries, 2 credit cards and a store card totalling 6000 for example.

 

You now owe HFC 6k

 

3/6 months down the line the leads are recycled so we call you to find out if we can 'better' the service you have, ie entice you into further lending.

 

There may be some valid points about signed credit agreements going missing, but trust me, as an ex employee the organisation is so disjointed, if they didn't have a signed credit agreement they wouldn't know anyway.

 

The only reason (in 99%) of cases is to increase your indebtness to the company as surprise surpise that's how they (a money lender) make money.

 

Hope that answers some of the questions that have been asked on here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just to put this to rest once and for all, the reason they keep contacting you is because HFC do not accept 'new customers'. They're business id driven through taking existing customers (introduced through our retail partners) and increasing the amount they are indebted to us.

 

For example - you take out a £700 TV retail agreement for curries.

 

Your details are then passed to the nearest branch who solicit you and entice you into a consolidation loan so...

 

You pay off curries, 2 credit cards and a store card totalling 6000 for example.

 

You now owe HFC 6k

 

3/6 months down the line the leads are recycled so we call you to find out if we can 'better' the service you have, ie entice you into further lending.

 

There may be some valid points about signed credit agreements going missing, but trust me, as an ex employee the organisation is so disjointed, if they didn't have a signed credit agreement they wouldn't know anyway.

 

The only reason (in 99%) of cases is to increase your indebtness to the company as surprise surpise that's how they (a money lender) make money.

 

Hope that answers some of the questions that have been asked on here.

 

 

As an ex-employee myself, I can confirm Dirty_Dog's post is completely true.

 

New customers are accepted, but very rarely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your input guys!

for FAQs & Step By Step

click here

for Templates Library

click here

for Court Bundle

click here

________________

 

WON 121o121 'vs' LloydsTSB

here

WON 121o121 'vs' Halifax C C

here

WON 121o121 'vs' Cahoot CC

here

WON 121o121 'vs' LloydsTSB (again)

here

 

________________

Link to post
Share on other sites

have we all visited marbles.com

 

Welcome to marbles.com

 

it says

 

 

blank.gifb_login.gif t_welcome.gif As of 12th April 2007 we will no longer be accepting any new applications for the marbles credit card. If you are an existing customer, you can continue to log into your account using the "my account" button on the left of this page. m_clear.jpgblank.gif if (cashback =="Y") { document.write(spend_Cashb); } If you are an existing marbles cardholder, you can continue to access the following cardholder benefits:

Safe Shopping Promise and

Tam Wing Chuen -v- Bank of Credit and Commerce Hong Kong Ltd [1996] 2 BCLC 69

 

1996

PC

Lord Mustill Commonwealth,

 

Lord Mustill discussed the need to construe a contract contra preferentem: "the basis of the contra proferentem principle is that the person who puts forward the wording of a proposed agreement may be assumed to have looked after his own interests, so that if words leave room for doubt about whether he is intended to have a particular benefit there is reason to suppose that he is not."

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes we have rumbled THEM

 

HFC History

 

HFC Bank was established in 1973 as the UK arm and wholly-owned subsidiary of Household International Inc, one of the largest independent consumer finance businesses in the United States.

In the UK, we have adapted and moulded ourselves over the last 30+ years to ensure we have remained at the forefront of consumer finance. Initiatives such as being the first high street lender to open on a Saturday and having children´s play areas in our branches have helped keep us ahead of the pack.

In 1998, HFC Bank merged with Beneficial Bank resulting in a new bank in terms of scale, size and opportunity. This merger was a significant milestone in our history - expanding our market presence and improving our growth potential.

In March 2003 both Household International Inc. and HFC Bank Ltd became part of the HSBC Group. Subsequently HFC Bank has become a limited company.

 

AND HFC HAVE BINNED ALL THE PAPERWORK !!!!

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/post-603698.html

 

So won't this then apply?

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft020.pdf

 

On page 11 in the 'Points to Note' it states:

An ‘individual’ may be a sole trader or a partnership as well as an ordinary

customer. On the other hand, a limited company can never be ‘an individual’;

and an agreement relating to credit provided, goods hired, leased, rented or

bailed to a limited company can therefore never, in normal circumstances,

be a regulated agreement.

 

Thought this may be of relevance.

Abbey - *SETTLED IN FULL!* ;)

-£445 refunded after one phonecall

HERE

 

Lloyds - Reclaiming Charges ***WON!***

-09/05/07 - Prelim delivered

-22/05/07 - LBA sent - no response

-11/07/07 - Filed at court

- 26/07/07 - Full settlement offer!!!! Donation made ;)

HERE

 

Next - Trying to Sue us with no agreement! :lol:

-29/06/07 - Defence filed

-16/08/07 - AQ filed

-19/09/07 - Claim struck out!! :p

HERE and continued HERE

 

PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES IF I'VE HELPED!

Link to post
Share on other sites

So won't this then apply?

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft020.pdf

 

On page 11 in the 'Points to Note' it states:

An ‘individual’ may be a sole trader or a partnership as well as an ordinary

customer. On the other hand, a limited company can never be ‘an individual’;

and an agreement relating to credit provided, goods hired, leased, rented or

bailed to a limited company can therefore never, in normal circumstances,

be a regulated agreement.

 

Thought this may be of relevance.

 

 

This actually means that if HFC Bank Ltd were to enter into a contract where credit was provided to them, they would be defined as a limited company and therefore the Consumer Credit Act does not normally apply to said contract.

 

Where HFC provide credit to an individual, then the CCA does normally apply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah thanks. I didnt read it properly and only realised yesterday lol. :rolleyes: :o

Abbey - *SETTLED IN FULL!* ;)

-£445 refunded after one phonecall

HERE

 

Lloyds - Reclaiming Charges ***WON!***

-09/05/07 - Prelim delivered

-22/05/07 - LBA sent - no response

-11/07/07 - Filed at court

- 26/07/07 - Full settlement offer!!!! Donation made ;)

HERE

 

Next - Trying to Sue us with no agreement! :lol:

-29/06/07 - Defence filed

-16/08/07 - AQ filed

-19/09/07 - Claim struck out!! :p

HERE and continued HERE

 

PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES IF I'VE HELPED!

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I asked for a settlement figure from HFC it came to almost as much as my owed balance. When I questioned this I was told that they add on the interest that would have been paid had I continued to pay monthly and then deduct the 20% settlement discount. I've just finished one agreement with them and have a few months to go with another. Never again will I use thiss bunch of clowns to finance anything. 29% APR? I don't know how they get away with it.

A+L S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 28th July. Statements rec'd 01 Sept. Letter requesting repayment of £4,979 sent 18/09 MCOL sent 15th Nov £6389.57. Cheque received £6425.54 4th Dec.:D

MBNA S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 28th July, promised reply by 28th August. Cheque rec'd £250 31 Aug.:confused: . 2nd letter sent 7 sept for rest of charges to be returned. £243 rec'd 28th Oct:D

CCA sent 1st Credit 11th August, reply 15th Aug

Request for repayment Rooftop Mortgages for £1095, reply saying no on 17th Aug.

Still to come: Cap. One, Time retail, HFC Bank.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hanen't you erer heard of Vanquis??? 59.9% is about right, whatever your credit history. If you're lucky you might get 46.6%... lol

Abbey - *SETTLED IN FULL!* ;)

-£445 refunded after one phonecall

HERE

 

Lloyds - Reclaiming Charges ***WON!***

-09/05/07 - Prelim delivered

-22/05/07 - LBA sent - no response

-11/07/07 - Filed at court

- 26/07/07 - Full settlement offer!!!! Donation made ;)

HERE

 

Next - Trying to Sue us with no agreement! :lol:

-29/06/07 - Defence filed

-16/08/07 - AQ filed

-19/09/07 - Claim struck out!! :p

HERE and continued HERE

 

PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES IF I'VE HELPED!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hanen't you erer heard of Vanquis??? 59.9% is about right, whatever your credit history. If you're lucky you might get 46.6%... lol

 

Provident Personal Credit have done APR's which are near on 200%. The largest I've seen was 176.5%. Thing is, these are tiny loans - £50 to £100. So the rate seems massive, whereas the actual interest charged in £'s is not. These are also doorstep lending and collecting - very high risk and therefore very high rate. I'm not sure if this company is still going though - it was over 7 years ago that a client showed me the contract.

 

The biggest risk to banks though is not poor paying customers, it's fraud. But that's another topic entirely.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...