Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hobnail you don't know Elms too well yet. I am surprised that they got as close as they did to adding up to 30. I think the poor dears get confused because most other letters they send out are to give 28 days notice. They even  have difficulty with their two times table and often consult with the char lady to confirm that 2 plus 2 equals 4.  Just act on the notion that they are total numpties and you won't be far out.
    • To carry on from the above post it may be helpful to go through their WS using their numbers. 9] motorists do NOT accept the contract when entering the land. First they have to read it and understand it and then they realise that a] "No stopping" is prohibitive and cannot offer a contract. b] the signs around the bus stop do not mention who issued the No Stopping signs so it could not have been issued by VCS since the IPC CoP states that their signs should include the IPC logo and the creditor be identified.  10]There is no mention of £100 charge for breaching the No stopping request or if there is it is far too small to read even for a pedestrian. 11] no matter how often VCS say it, it is NOT a contractual clause   22]" the claimant has given the Defendant its contractual licence to enter the site". No it hasn't. This is a road leading to the airport. All sorts of people are going to the airport-travellers, taxis, fuel bowsers, airport staff, companies delivering food and drink for each aircraft, air traffic controllers, buses. It is absolutely ridiculous to attribute VCS wth any sort of permissions. The land owners yes, but not VCS . There can be no sort of analogy between a car park and a major thoroughfare where VCS have no place as it is not relevant land.   23] there can be no contract as there is no offer only a prohibition. And it is not relevant land no matter how Mr Walli attempts to prove otherwise. 25] VCS may have won a few times but none quoted was on an airport covered by the RTA and its own Byelaws. They also have lost more cases than they have won using their prohibitive signs. 26] First one has to consider if there is a contract. Is it relevant land? No. Does a valid contract exist betweer VCS and Peel? NO.  27] the signage at the bus stop may show the conditions ie  no stopping, and restricted zone but not the terms ie is there a charge for stopping and who is the creditor. The last section of the sign is illegible  29] already stated that a WS between VCS and peel is not a valid document 31] it will need more than the Claimants feather to outweigh the case against the Defendant no matter who was driving. 32] there is no law of agency involved. This is not a case of employer/employedd relationship. VCS are muddying the waters because they have no way of transferring the driver's liability to the keeper 33] this a red herring. There is no list of highways at all  on the Highways act 1980 so this is a deliberate strategy to debunk the fact that this road is not relevant land. VCS are put to strict proof that it is relevant land not covered by the Road Traffic Act nor by Byelaws. 34] there ican be no comparison between a railway station and an airport. Totally fatuous analogy.  35] yes the landowners can bring in their own terms but what the cannot do is overrule Byelaws and the Road Traffic Act. 39] surely the paralegal cannot be that ignorant of PoFA. If Bye Laws are involved then the bus stop is not relevant land and so the specious argument about FGW is rubbish   36] what on earth is he talking about with Permits. There is no mention of permits on the signage and even if there were  would it mean that Permit holders were allowed to stop on No Stopping roads? There are enough examples on CAG to counter act their idiocy on continuing charging the extra £60   46] VCS had NO reasonable cause to apply to the DVLA for the Defendants details. No valid  contract with the landowners No stopping is prohibitive therefore cannot form a contract the event happened on a bus stop over which VCS has no jurisdiction the signage either does not show that there was a charge of £100 for stopping, or the font size was too small for a motorist to be able to read it  the signage does not show the Creditor which fails the IPC CoP so not valid the WS contract does not appear to authorise VCS to pursue motorists to Court Given all these factors it seems that VCS have breached the GDPR of the Defendant quite substantially and it would appear right that an exemplary award is made against VCS in the hope that they will drop all further cases at Doncaster airport where they are pursuing motorists on non relevant land.   48] what is this guy on? You weren't in a car park you were on a bus stop 59] this case is totally without merit. I am not surprised that the paralegal will not be turning up. Some statements are pretty close to perjury and others are designed to mislead or misdirect. None of the analogies seem appropriate or relevant. Could have been said in at least half the time without the repetition and trying to make a case where none was there. One particularly bad example of misdirection was in the photographs. The Clearway sign shown near the bus stop is very unclear  unlike the Clearway sign two photos before it which may well include terms and conditions. The one by the bus stop is totally different.      
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote...   your defence doesnt need any return of docs.. carefully read what has been posted here and in the other threads i pointed to in your old thread merged here too.   redwood/harwood or STA or brachers.   just use our enhanced google search box.   uni fees is useful too.   this guy is just in front of you    
    • Tech firm CEO Jeff Lawson warns bosses not to make hasty judgements about their employees.View the full article
    • I have just spent last few hours registering and signing up and filling in all the details.   Below is a POC I have drafted.   The defendant is a parcel delivery company DPD (UK) LIMITED On 09/08/2021 the defendant agreed to deliver the claimant's parcel containing a PlayStation 5 Disc Version value £530, to an address in the UK. The delivery fee of £7.79 was paid by the claimant. Parcel tracking number: ???????? Parcel reference no: ????????? The defendant failed to deliver the parcel and have reported it as lost on 20/08/2021. The defendant refuses to refund the full value of the item and the delivery fee. The claimant seeks £530 being the value of the item, £7.79 delivery cost and legal fees.        (Sorry for being stupid but this POC is supposed to go where it says    " Claim details Why you believe you’re owed the money: " right? Reason why I'm asking is because I don't see anywhere it specifically says what are your particulars of claim)   Tomorrow being the 15th day, I will be ready to click it off (assuming the POC is ok)    I have read a few more hermes/packlink etc stories where they were resolved and gives me hope I will regain my lost money.  Will carry on reading up as much as I can.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Rayne Vs HSBC - Round 2


Rayne
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4101 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

Afternoon all

 

Just had an offer on first claim today for the full amount (or close enough) so now starting on 2nd claim as they've kindly slapped on about £550 since the first claim started PLUS I missed £107 worth in the first one.

 

For the first claim please see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/62691-rayne-hsbc-scummers.html

 

And to everyone that assisted in that first claim... a HUGE thank you for your kindness and help as I couldn't have done it without you. :D

 

As a point to note, and just out of curiosity, in their offer letter they stated "without liability"...could it not be stated that a condition of acceptance of any offer is that they DO accept liability? Where would or could that lead?

 

Following letter going out as soon as Claim One is settled in full:

 

Since 13 February this year you have deducted from my account almost £600 in charges, despite my successfully claiming £2,800.21 against you. I am frankly shocked that you have operated my account in this way as I had always reposed confidence in your integrity and expertise as my fiduciary.

I now understand that the regime of fees which you have been applying to my account in relation to direct debit refusals, exceeding overdraft limits and so forth are unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent consumer regulations.

I would draw your attention to the terms of the contract which you agreed to at the time that I opened my account. It is an implied term of that contract that you would conduct yourselves lawfully and in a manner which complies with UK law, which you have clearly failed to do.

 

I calculate that you have taken £657.50. Included in that amount are also charges I initially missed in my original claim which I now include.

 

I am enclosing a copy of the schedule of the charges which I am claiming.

 

I require repayment in full of this money. If you do not comply fully within 14 days then I shall begin another claim against you for the full amount plus interest plus my costs and without further notice.

 

Please be aware that as I have already successfully claimed against you I will have no compunctions about going “all the way” with this claim.

If it is your contention that your charges are lawful then I look forward to arguing the case in court, which we both know will not happen as HSBC and their legal representatives, DG Solicitors, have always settled out of court in the many hundreds of cases brought against them, thereby wasting valuable court time and money.

Please also note that with the added expense of my filing against you again then the cost to you increases from £657.50 to approximately £800.00, give or take, so it is in your best interests to settle earlier rather than later.

I look forward to your earliest settlement.

Yours faithfully,

If anyone can see anything wrong there please say now before it goes to HSBC. I realise it's somewhat harder hitting than previously and runs some inherent risk but I'm not pussyfooting with them this time...not that I did anyway :D

DCA's - they have the same power as an infinite number of untrained chimps working on a script for Hamlet, but the chimps would probably at least get it right :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 305
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

okies boss :D

DCA's - they have the same power as an infinite number of untrained chimps working on a script for Hamlet, but the chimps would probably at least get it right :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

boo :D

 

might wanna do my original thread as well lol but okies boss man ;)

DCA's - they have the same power as an infinite number of untrained chimps working on a script for Hamlet, but the chimps would probably at least get it right :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

so how u explain my missus? ;)

DCA's - they have the same power as an infinite number of untrained chimps working on a script for Hamlet, but the chimps would probably at least get it right :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

sayin nawt about peoples fiancees

 

Regarding your missed charges I think you have lost them because you have agreed not to claim again between the dates of your first claim and from what you have said they fall between those dates.

 

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pete, I only agreed that it was full and final settlement of that particular claim ONLY, not between the dates of it. Does that not leave it open-ended?

DCA's - they have the same power as an infinite number of untrained chimps working on a script for Hamlet, but the chimps would probably at least get it right :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

They worded it as between specified dates, however my acceptance stated that my acceptance was in regard to that specific claim ONLY, not specifying any dates.

 

I suppose I could try it, see what happens. At the end of the day they'll at worst disregard that part of the claim and contest it, but still out of court. Because of the wording of my acceptance it shouldn't be too hard to push it I would have thought. End of the day it's still charges that have been unlawfully taken and remain, as yet, unclaimed.

 

FYi, exact wording of DG's letter has been posted in my original thread as these two seem to be crossing a bit lol

DCA's - they have the same power as an infinite number of untrained chimps working on a script for Hamlet, but the chimps would probably at least get it right :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a problem with running two threads

I think its worth keeping in for now because you will be settling your claim with DG, if you dig your heels in they will have two alternatives, pay you or go to court, one of those they wont do under any circumstances. I do think you will have to fight on your hands though.

pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

good, i prefer a straight fight :mad:

 

on a lighter note, booked the honeymoon today, 2 weeks fully inclusive full on honeymoon package in the Maldives :D :D :D Thank you VERY much HSBC ;)

DCA's - they have the same power as an infinite number of untrained chimps working on a script for Hamlet, but the chimps would probably at least get it right :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rayne I think that you will be ok with this particularly if you are claiming for any more recent charges as HSBC again will want to settle before you get to court. As you say you agreed settlement of your previous claim which was set out in your schedule of charges you have settled on that not on the time period.

 

As for this Lattie....hmmmmm "ALL"!!!! enough said :lol:

 

ALL the clever ones are girlys!

Guide to claiming back your bank charges

 

Most of your questions can be answered by following this link.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, ok lobotomy successful, i'm back. they took out the daft part of my brain, hopefully. in an attempt at reconciliation with my fellow forum users - sometimes we generalise. i said the other day to crusher - i think if we all met up - we'd probably be surprised at the reality and wouldn't be able to match people up with their on-line personas. but i find it funny the in a lot of cases - peeps (including me) don't even get the gender right. and you have to admit - in general, forum users tend to think everyone is a male unless you have a girlie username or avatar. so, not all the clever ones are girlys - but more than you think!

Link to post
Share on other sites

could start on with all the "blonde" jokes...but it's sunday and it's my brain's day off today

 

oh never buy a tesco value dvd player, not if u don't want ppl to know where u get it from...start it up and it says "Tesco" in big words across ur screen, oh the shame!!! lol

DCA's - they have the same power as an infinite number of untrained chimps working on a script for Hamlet, but the chimps would probably at least get it right :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

nothing bud, it's just the fact it's their value line and i'm a snob lol

DCA's - they have the same power as an infinite number of untrained chimps working on a script for Hamlet, but the chimps would probably at least get it right :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

quick question about my 2nd prelim letter, which is going out on 7th May

 

When I refer to the dates between which they charged, how does

 

My request

I am writing to ask you to refund to me the charges which you have levied from my account between 6th June 2001 and 7th May 2007, which also contain charges that I missed in my first successful claim against you.

look to everyone else? Don't wanna shoot myself in my own foot on the word go. Or shall I just leave it as standard wording?

DCA's - they have the same power as an infinite number of untrained chimps working on a script for Hamlet, but the chimps would probably at least get it right :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

right then, full letter below. Have a read and see what you think ladies and gentlemen :)

 

"My request

I am writing to ask you to refund to me the charges which you have levied from my account between 6th June 2001 and 7th May 2007, which also contain charges that I missed in my first successful claim against you.

I understand that the regime of fees which you have been applying to my account in relation to direct debit refusals, exceeding overdraft limits and so forth are unlawful at Common Law, Statute and recent consumer regulations. If you say that they are not, then will you please demonstrate this by letting me have a full breakdown of the costs to which you have been put by as a result of my breaches, in order to reassure me that your penalties really do reflect your costs.

 

Additionally, it has now been confirmed that your particularly high level of penalties are considered to be unfair per se by the OFT who reported on the 5th April 2006 and are therefore presumed to be unlawful in the absence of specific proof to the contrary.

 

Your responsibilities

I would draw your attention to the terms of the contract which you agreed to at the time that I opened my account. It is an implied term of that contract that you would conduct yourselves lawfully and in a manner which complies with UK law.

 

I am frankly shocked that you have operated my account in this way as I had always reposed confidence in your integrity and expertise as my fiduciary.

I consider that your repeated representations that your charges are fair and reasonable are deceptive and that they have deceived me into agreeing to pay them.

Your concealment of the true nature of your charges has prevented me from asserting my right until now.

 

What I require

I calculate that you have taken £657.50. I enclose a schedule of the charges which I am claiming with this letter.

 

 

My targets to resolve this matter

I hope that you will enter into a sincere dialogue with me about this matter this time and I am writing this letter to you on the assumption that you will prefer to do this than merely respond with standard letters and leaflets.

 

I will give you 14 days to reply to me accepting, unconditionally, my request in principle and letting me know a date by which I will receive payment.

 

If you do not respond, or you do not respond positively, within this time period, I shall send you a letter before action giving you a further 14 days in which to reflect. I believe that these targets are more than sufficient for a large company such as yours with dedicated staff and departments.

 

After that, there will be no further communication from me and I shall issue a claim at the expiry of the second deadline. I would urge you to settle this matter earlier rather than later as failure to do so will incur further costs against you, with the addition of court costs and any other fees I may need to pay in order to bring another successful claim against yourselves.

 

Yours faithfully,

DCA's - they have the same power as an infinite number of untrained chimps working on a script for Hamlet, but the chimps would probably at least get it right :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would split it out a bit more and say something like I am claiming for charges between x date and x date. In addition I am also claiming x number of charges that were missing from my earlier successful claim between x date and x date. :-)

Guide to claiming back your bank charges

 

Most of your questions can be answered by following this link.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...