new hsbc claim filed

[apollo69]

right, sent the preliminary letter this morning to "poor old" mr Bowden. We shall wait and see. It is for 1325.50 on one ac and 1141.50 on the other account over six years, oh plus interest of course! Need to open a new account over the weekend though methinks!

[BankFodder]

Yes, open one quickly - maybe a couple. Why not.

[apollo69]

I am claiming on my sole and jt accounts. Anyone know if they would be entitled to close my jt account although there are two parties. I am guessing yes......?!

[BankFodder]

They can and will do anything they want

[apollo69]

oh I forgot ....they are the ones that write the rules LOL!

[apollo69]

Letter before action emailed and posted. Included another £150 of charges that have cropped up since end Feb! Their deadline, Monday 10th April 5pm! Watch this space!

[apollo69]

Update. The 14 days before filing is up Sunday at midnight. Today I received a letter confirming that the charges are legal.

 

"In respect of unauthorised overdrafts, the relevant clauses are 7.11 to 7.18. In these circumstances, these (sic!) is a process that incolves the Bank considering whether or not to pay the item". They are still saying that there is manual intervention in other words.

 

But that "in view of my comments I have today refunded the £250 charges applied to your account ********, as a gesture of goodwill. Please note, no further refunds will be made in respect of charges levied in accordance with the bank's standard tariff. "

 

Then the bit that made me laugh "Naturally I would not want to see you inconvenienced in this manner again, particularly as you can enjoy charges-free banking when your balance is maintained within the agreed overfraft limit."

 

The letter is from an AA Phillips in Swansea Credit Services. It refers me back to Head Office Customer Relations in London, where I sent my complaint to in the first place, when there was no response from M Bowden.

 

Roll on Moneyclaim!

[apollo69]

please can you cast your eyes over this. Moneyclaim to be filed tomorrow:

 

The claimant has had a contract with the defendant, HSBC Bank PLC, dated XXXX and which is conducted on their standard terms and conditions under references ************. The claimant is claiming the return of money taken by the defendant in the way of charges over the last 6 years plus court costs plus interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act. 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. The bank has repeatedly been asked the bank to justify their charges has not been able to do so, merely contending that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant.

 

Thanks

[norvernrob]

please can you cast your eyes over this. Moneyclaim to be filed tomorrow:

 

The claimant has had a contract with the defendant, HSBC Bank PLC, dated XXXX and which is conducted on their standard terms and conditions under references ************. The claimant is claiming the return of money taken by the defendant in the way of charges over the last 6 years plus court costs plus interest pursuant to section 69 County Courts Act. 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. The bank has repeatedly been asked the bank to justify their charges has not been able to do so, merely contending that the charges were debited in accordance with the terms of the contract between itself and the Claimant.

 

Thanks

 

'The bank has repeatedly been asked the bank' - you need to remove the 2nd 'the bank'!

[apollo69]

ta!

[CheeseOnToast]

novernrob to the rescue again!

 

Let me know how it goes Apollo - Did you see the user in the Litigation Concluded section, they seemed to settle quite quickly for them!

[apollo69]

MCOL claim filed!

[apollo69]

They have until tomorrow to acknowledge service otherwise I will be going for a judgement!

[apollo69]

This topic was closed on 03/06/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support their.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group