Claiming on a Business account? Lets join forces?

[empowered]

Why Josh? Nobody else apart from you has posted potentially libellous remarks:rolleyes: If you don't know what you are talking about then refrain from posting confusing comments and advice.

[JOSH_IOU]

well apart from someones username.

if were being silly

[elsinore]

Therefore should complainants be pursuing the legal avenue in relation to reclaiming penalty charges on business bank accounts at this time, which is what this thread has been claiming we should be doing?

 

Nothing to stop you filing your claim but, as Zoot says, it may be stayed.

 

On the other hand you might get a result like this one today

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/124800-hsbc-business-account-claim-3.html

 

Els:)

[Rooster-UK]

JOSH IOU & empowered.

If you have any useful input to post on this thread then please continue.

 

If, however, you continue to insult, snipe and pass snide comments at each other then I will remove all of your posts from this thread and put them into a new thread in the Bear Garden, where you can bitch at each other to your hearts content.

 

Rooster-UK.

[TheyrCriminals]

Anyone,

 

Where can we get a copy of the agreement between the OFT, FSA and the banks?

 

Thanks.

 

TheyrCriminals

[hsbcfiddled]

Is this what you are looking for?

www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/personal-current-accounts/bankagreement.pdf -

[JOSH_IOU]

How can questions be answered without a full break down of charges.

Surely this has to be tabled before proceedings can begin.

 

If not what exactly are they doing?

[empowered]

JOSH IOU & empowered.

 

 

If you have any useful input to post on this thread then please continue.

 

If, however, you continue to insult, snipe and pass snide comments at each other then I will remove all of your posts from this thread and put them into a new thread in the Bear Garden, where you can bitch at each other to your hearts content.

 

Rooster-UK.

 

Sorry Rooster! I had no intention to insult etc, only to ask that Josh could make his points clearly, as it makes for very difficult reading and comprehension sometimes! Wrist duly slapped:o

[TheyrCriminals]

Hi hsbcfiddled,

 

Thank you for that.

 

TheyrCriminals

[TheyrCriminals]

Hello Everyone,

 

There is clearly a lot of confusion regarding business accounts and stays being imposed and lifted. It appears the policy of HBOS plc is to make offers on business accounts. It appears that Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc (the second biggest bank in the UK and owner of NatWest) are not just making offers but going a step further and expressly stating the current OFT test case does not relate to business accounts.

 

As we know in most cases it seems now that stays are not getting lifted by citing the 'business account' reason. The Financial Services Authority has explicitly stated in its Waiver Review Report that small businesses are not covered by the waiver. Yet the courts continue to stay claims involving business accounts and appear to justify this, which they are, in actual fact, probably doing correctly.

 

In the agreement between the banks which I have now read (and should have read a long time ago), the penalty at common law issue is raised by the banks. The banks, as part of their counterclaim, want a ruling on this too. Therefore it does appear that the penalties issue will be decided, despite not being detailed in the OFT Particulars of Claim. Therefore business accounts ARE part of the test case, and if their is a pending case in the system that will decide business accounts too Judges will stay these claims.

 

However there still seems to be some reconciliation needed with the FSA Waiver Review Report and the courts. This is still slightly confusing, but explainable. On the one hand the FSA are saying dont suspend complaints that are small business claims as they are not covered by the waiver. The courts however seem to be more independent of this and it appears that the Waiver Review is not binding on them, but more importantly with business accounts effectively part of the test case the courts see every reason to continue the stay on business claims. This now, in my mind, does seem logical.

 

If business accounts are to be decided in the test case, which I do not doubt any longer, the FSA stating that business accounts are not covered by the waiver means very little in court when a precedent may only be around the corner. The Waiver Review I think would be more helpful if you are pursuing a complaint throught the FOS. But if your thinking of pursuing the legal avenue don't be surprised if the judge considers the Waiver Review Report nothing more than a waste of his/her time, and in all honesty I don't think we can actually blame him/her.

 

This is just obviously my view on the matter, but having gone through the whole process myself and indulged in a plethora of reading I think it may advance the issue further.

 

Any thoughts welcome.

 

TheyrCriminals

[photoman]

A very good post.

Obviously after much reading and consideration.

 

I agree with you; as a decision or announcement from the courts regards the OFT case is now fairly imminent, then they do appear to be playing on the cautious side when it comes to "drawing a line in the sand" defining the extent and scope of the implications of the cases' outcome.

[TheyrCriminals]

Hi Guys,

 

I saw somewhere on here that business account claims for a limited company are difficult to claim from if the company is now dissolved. However if a lot of personal finance had been credited to the account then there might be an avenue for recovery. My sister's husband wants to know if someone has posted, or if not could post up, a Particulars of Claim for this situation.

 

Thank you.

 

TheyrCriminals

[TheyrCriminals]

Any thoughts anyone?

 

TheyrCriminals

[andrew1]

Any thoughts anyone?

 

TheyrCriminals

 

I don't think anyone has actually put a POC together for a closed company account. I'm about to but to be honest mines not quite so simple and I wouldn't want anyone following what I'm about to try

 

It is extremely difficult depending on exactly what the circumstances of what has been loaned/injected into the company, when and in what format. It's a matter of analysis of how the company was closed. If liquidated for example it becomes even more difficult. I'd suggest getting some legal advice first.

[TheyrCriminals]

Hi Andrew,

 

Thanks for the reply. The company was not liquidated it was dissolved. I phoned a solicitor in the Yellow Pages a while back, in all fairness he was pretty good he spent at least half an hour on the phone to me giving me free legal advice. I know it is more difficult and I know how the account was funded is paramount to any claim. I would be gratfeul if you could post up something from your PoC and I coul dmaybe delete and/or amend any details that are not relevant to mine.

 

Thank you.

 

TheyrCriminals

[andrew1]

Hi Andrew,

 

I would be grateful if you could post up something from your PoC and I could maybe delete and/or amend any details that are not relevant to mine.

 

 

I don't think you would :grin:

[JOSH_IOU]

[andrew1]

Hi Andrew,

 

Thanks for the reply. The company was not liquidated it was dissolved. I phoned a solicitor in the Yellow Pages a while back, in all fairness he was pretty good he spent at least half an hour on the phone to me giving me free legal advice. I know it is more difficult and I know how the account was funded is paramount to any claim. I would be gratfeul if you could post up something from your PoC and I coul dmaybe delete and/or amend any details that are not relevant to mine.

 

Thank you.

 

TheyrCriminals

 

Personally, I would go back in this thread and have a look at one of Photomans or one of the other well researched POC's and adjust it slightly to reflect the fact that whilst claiming on a personal basis this is a company claim in essence. Maybe that lawyer would assist in fine tuning that. You will face problems as the company is dissolved, your case should be built around the financial injections that went into the company and the dates, and how that shored the company up to pay the charges. Somehow you have to reflect the fact that it was outside money that kept paying the charges and keeping the business rather than the bank and the overdraft was a result of charges.

 

There are not many on here who would try this I don't think hence the difficulty in getting any POC's mentioned. I'm afraid I'm a little more risky in what I do, but you must be aware of the legal costs as everyone keeps reminding me on my more bravado schemes. You must also be told to be careful of raising any costs issues which could write off any gains.

 

I like to test situations until I recognise it's time to pull out, but that only comes once I am told in no uncertain terms I'm chasing a red herring by people who understand what they are doing far better than me. Lawyers always vie on the side of caution and rightly so to protect their clients from exposure to costs - I push the boundaries and sail close to the wind...you have to decide how far you want to sail. You have nothing to lose as far as I can see, but you need to cherry pick your words. There are some really good revised POC's further back - it takes some reading and researching, but then that's half the fun. Good luck..sorry I haven't got one I can pull out of a hat for you, but mine will only confuse...

 

Sarah

[TheyrCriminals]

Hi Sarah,

 

Thank you very much for the above post, it is very helpful. I guess I will get researching and give it my best shot!

 

Thanks again.

 

TheyrCriminals

[Goldlady]

When the company was dissolved were there any other creditors?

[TheyrCriminals]

Hi Goldlady,

 

Yes there are other ongoing creditors because the business is still trading it's just that they are no longer a company, instead they are a partnership now.

 

TheyrCriminals

[Goldlady]

OK, my logic was that if the company had been dissolved with debts to the Government that the bank could argue that it wasn't your money. However if it was dissolved cos it was no longer used (as our company was) then I think you have a green light to claim the charges as a former director/shareholder who used their personal money to keep the company going. In our case we don't actually stand to get any money back - we have just asked them to write off the o/d (which they would have had to do anyway).

 

Go for it - you have nothing to lose IMO;)

[TheyrCriminals]

Hi Again Goldlady,

 

Thank you very much for that. Any ideas for a suggested PoC?

 

TheyrCriminals

[andrew1]

Hi Again Goldlady,

 

Thank you very much for that. Any ideas for a suggested PoC?

 

TheyrCriminals

 

What have you come up with on the previous POC's I mentioned earlier TrC or are you really struggling to find something to put together?

[TheyrCriminals]

Hi Andrew,

 

So far I have found two of Photoman's Poc's for business accounts, and whilst they look good, they do not appear too relevant to claiming on company that is now dissolved. So I'm still struggling really.

 

TheyrCriminals