FRISP v HFC

[frisp]

FOS response to my complaint in regard to their lack of an an agreement and their refusal to return charges

This complaint is over 3 years old and they've finally finished their investigation with the expected wishy washy findings.

i.e.

I can challenge the agreement in court and charges are part of the service blah blah

Interestingly they added that I should appraise myself of Carey v HSBC and Teasdale v HSBC.

The former I'm aware of but the latter is it worth looking up?

[pt2537]

Re: FRISP v HFC

Carey and teasdale are pretty much the same case, the latter being the costs hearing for the failed claims which were included with Carey case.

Carey said that to comply with s78(1) of the 1974 act, they dont need the signed agreement, but that they can reconstitute the agreement from other sources,

So, i dont think you need to worry about teasdale unless you are unsuccessful in court

I think that you need to be careful if you are challenging the agreement, you need more nowadays than the fact that they dont have the signed agreement

i mean, did you sign anything? when you were given the card? can you remember? if you can what did you sign? what were the terms ?

these are the questions you need to consider and answer when you want to use the CCA as a sword, rather than a shield

thats my view anyway

[frisp]

Re: FRISP v HFC

Thanks PT, what if the agreements are signed, illegible with no T&Cs?

[Joanna C]

Re: FRISP v HFC

Carey and teasdale are pretty much the same case, the latter being the costs hearing for the failed claims which were included with Carey case.

Carey said that to comply with s78(1) of the 1974 act, they dont need the signed agreement, but that they can reconstitute the agreement from other sources,

So, i dont think you need to worry about teasdale unless you are unsuccessful in court

I think that you need to be careful if you are challenging the agreement, you need more nowadays than the fact that they dont have the signed agreement

i mean, did you sign anything? when you were given the card? can you remember? if you can what did you sign? what were the terms ?

these are the questions you need to consider and answer when you want to use the CCA as a sword, rather than a shield

thats my view anyway

Carey and Teasdale deal with different issues

The Teasedale cases related to 7 cases where the Claimants had had to discontinue after the issue of proceedings because the Defendant banks either admitted they could not comply with s.78 or provided documentation after the issue of proceedings that complied with s.78. The Claimants could no longer proceed for a declaration and asked for their costs up to the point of the Defendant banks copmpliance. HHJ Waksman was giving a decision on the selected cases in order to give guidance to the lower courts.

Inexplicably his view was that though the Defendant banks had not complied with their statutory obligations the Claimants should pay all costs. The effect of this Judgment was that s.77,78 &79 were rendered practically useless.

An application for permission to appeal the Judgment in two cases was made to the Court of Appeal in April and in both cases permission was received last week.