Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

[jumper999]

Re: Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

Am I entitled to request back my charges from HSBC? this would bring the balance down.

[Godzilla]

Re: Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

Hello jumper

Have you filed a defence to this action as yet?

There is in your defence solid legal grounds to contend with against this claim by HSBC.

You missed a few payments, but at or during that time you were communicating with the creditor informing him of your financial difficulties and clearly you were making a serious effort to re-pay or bring the arrears up to date, the creditor refused your offers.

In these circumstances you gave a clear and unequivocal statement to the creditor and that was that you had no intention of breaking the agreement/contract, buy refusing to allow you to make lesser payments and bring the account up to date, the creditor's cause of action (terminating) was unjust, the DN [is] an issue/part of your defence, but what is central to your defence is the fact that it is the creditor who broke the agreement/contract, his actions [are] a fundamental breach of the contract, the creditor repudiated the agreement/contract at a time when it simply was unjust to do so.

Some or many will not agree with my statement/post on your case, nonetheless, you have a defence that is complete in law, the Brandon case is not a comparator for the circumstances involved to your case.

You are liable for the arrears only, the creditor's unjust actions have caused the loss to himself, you did not cause the loss.

I hope that will help you with your case, regardless of what anyone else thinks of the legal argument that has been posted by me.

Kind Regards

Godzilla

[jumper999]

Re: Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

Thanks Godzilla and I agree with you 100%.

I had no intention to break my agreement as I had always used my cc to help me when I needed it and I had always used it sensible and wisely. Never did I pay late or below the minimum amount.

I informed HSBC prior to when I was expecting to get in to financial difficulty and I kept in regular touch with my situation. I pleaded many times with them to come to an arrangement.

At that time I also had a claim against them for unfair charges in court, you know the one with the Banks v OFT, so maybe there was a little tension I don't know, maybe that is why they were so unreasonable to agree.

I do however feel severely prejudiced against and no matter how scary the thought of going to court and getting a CCJ against me is, I do feel that I did not do anything wrong or against the law.

When I complained to the FOS about HSBC, HSBC agreed that I could pay £1 a month..........but I could not agree because at that time HSBC did not send my SAR, and it was only after complaining about them to the ICO did they send it.

I could not agree to an installment at that time as I did not know the true amount owing to HSBC as I knew that there were approx £500 worth of charges that they had added.

Blimey! what a sag hey..........but I know that I have not done anything wrong in all of this at all. There is nothing that I did not do to co-operate. Now the threat of going to court is not good for my mental health or sanity, but then again should that be enough reason to be put off. I am not afraid of going to court or getting a CCJ as I know I would only be ordered to pay back what I could..........but even if this is the normal practice of lenders to treat their customers like this then we have no hope.

One thing I would like to ask is that this question should be put to HSBC :

AS A LENDER WHAT DID YOU DO TO HELP THE CUSTOMER WHEN THEY CONTACTED YOU WHEN THEY WERE IN FINANCIAL DIFFICULTY?

DID YOU SUPPORT, AGREE TO ANY SETTLEMENT, REDUCE THEIR PAYMENTS, WHAT IF ANYTHING AS A BANK AND LENDER DID YOU DO?

Well these questions are just going on in my mind at the mo,

[Guest]

Re: Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

Well after reading so many threads on here, CAG and other sites I think that all forums site team members should make an announemnet in big bold preferably red writing that anyone who has a DN and dose not comply with the cca then there is nothing they can do about.

Many people come to forums as a last and only hope left after exhausting many legal channels. I can see that many many people have been issued with Default Notices which contain many flaws and the advice they receive from many good people and some with not so much knowledge and carry on in the belief that theydo stand some chance of either getting out of the mess they are or some other kind of help.

I know that there are many who did not ever dream of being where they are today whether through their own mistake, negligenece or if life cut them a raw deal. The truth of the matter is that it is a cruel world now and it in the financial world its dog eat dog.

If people do not have a chance of getting anywhere even though they have defective DN'D then I think they should not be receiving advice from other people saying that they do and advising them to inform the creditors and accept unlawful recsission.

I have just read on a thread on CAG a cagger giving advice to someone on their loan, not credit card but a regulated loan that as they have received a faulty DN then it is game over for the lender. Now why would people be allowed to give out that kind of advice if it leads people up the garden path and lose their case.

Really I cannot understand this.

Well after reading so many threads on here, CAG and other sites I think that all forums site team members should make an announemnet in big bold preferably red writing that anyone who has a DN and dose not comply with the cca then there is nothing they can do about.

Many people come to forums as a last and only hope left after exhausting many legal channels. I can see that many many people have been issued with Default Notices which contain many flaws and the advice they receive from many good people and some with not so much knowledge and carry on in the belief that theydo stand some chance of either getting out of the mess they are or some other kind of help.

I know that there are many who did not ever dream of being where they are today whether through their own mistake, negligenece or if life cut them a raw deal. The truth of the matter is that it is a cruel world now and it in the financial world its dog eat dog.

If people do not have a chance of getting anywhere even though they have defective DN'D then I think they should not be receiving advice from other people saying that they do and advising them to inform the creditors and accept unlawful recsission.

I have just read on a thread on CAG a cagger giving advice to someone on their loan, not credit card but a regulated loan that as they have received a faulty DN then it is game over for the lender. Now why would people be allowed to give out that kind of advice if it leads people up the garden path and lose their case.

Really I cannot understand this.

HI
I know I said I would not comment further but I think that this is a different matter.
You are quite correct in your analysis , people should not be advising a course of action which is at best unproven and at worst suicidal.
There is nothing wrong with having idea in fact that is what these forums are for , the idea should be debated and analysed before any one tries it .
The act has been in operation for over 25 years now and we have to work within its current parameters. We have to look at the way things are done, it is fine theorising ,but if you try and challenge the conventional methods that courts use 1000 times every week you have to be dammed sure of your ground.
There is nothing new about using section 87 in order to gain advantage. In the late eighties and nineties there used to be adverts in the papers, usually the tabloids or the back pages of the exchange and Mart. “Clean up your credit record”, they would say “ for just £50 we will send you a kit where you can remove your CCJ,s and then apply for new credit.”
The kit consisted of a preformatted application to the court for a set aside on the grounds that the default notice was ineffective.
The idea was that once you received the acknowledgement from the court you could then send in to the registrar judgementss, they would notify the CRAs to remove your name from their lists, this was before the advent of computers of course.
This would then give you a window of a few weeks where your file would be clear( the time taken for the debtor to apply a new notice and re file), if you where lucky the creditor would not bother ,or you could contact him and negotiate a deal.
Mostly though the creditor would reissue the default and the court would issue summery judgement.
Now of course with the speed that these transactions can be accomplished this is not really workable..
The point is the idea of re issuing a default is not a new thing it is accepted practice, as I said earlier if you are going to challenge accepted practice you are going to have to show a good argument, this doesn’t even approximate one.
One final point totally unrelated. LA the creditor cancelling your right to draw credit on a running account and asking you to return your card does not mean that your account has been terminate, they can restrict of terminate your ability to draw down credit at any time.
Peter

[jumper999]

Re: Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

Thank you peter for commenting so you believe that after all I have said and what has happened that I do not have grounds to defend.......put the faulty DN aside.

Even after I did my best? You think the court would not care? It is already proven that the creditor does/did not care as I would not be where I am today........but the court will look at every case individually will they not?

I know that either way I will get a CCJ and will only be ordered to pay what I can afford, that is why I can't understand why did HSBC not accept my reasonable offer from day one?

Would the court see that as a fair practice of a lender to treat their customers like that? Or as you say and as it is creditors do not care.

Also again I need to know am I entitled to request the charges back that HSBC applied to my account because that would be a counterclaim?

[Godzilla]

Re: Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

Hello again jumper

I really do think that you ought to change your frame of mind set to your particular case, for I wholly believe that you do have a defence that is not only recognized in law, it[is] a defence that is complete in law and does undermine the claimant's cause of action in its entirety.

You were not and are not the contract breaker in these circumstances, the creditor himself has caused the damage to him and his unjust actions have swept the ground from underneath his feet and left no ground available for him to step forth upon and succeed with his claim.

I have posted on this subject (defective DN/repudiation/regulated Credit Agreement) on another forum and many cases/threads of this type, this particular subject will need to be determined on a case by case basis as there are going to be different circumstances/series of events involved with each case.

A one shoe size fits all simply will not suffice to ensure that justice is sufficiently served.

I have a case in Court today based on arguments put forward by me that are being used in the defence against a creditor who repudiated on the agreement/contract, I am very hopeful of a successful conclusion for the defendant and when they email me with the result, I shall post up the result (with their consent of course).

Peter, with respect, I wholly disagree with your argument, that is, a defective DN extinguishes the termination/ending of the agreement even if both parties to the said agreement have agreed that it is ended.

Anyway, jumper, you can defend this action, all you need do is state the facts (the series of events) of how you tried to make up for the missed payments, the creditor refused, the creditor had no grounds to end the agreement/contract as you clearly indicated that it was your intention to remain bound to the agreement/contract, the creditor, by his unjust actions clearly indicated that he did not.

I hope that helps you somewhat.

Kind Regards

Godzilla

[jumper999]

Re: Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

Thanks Godzilla for your advice and I look forward to seeing what you come back with.

[Guest]

Re: Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

Thanks Godzilla for your advice and I look forward to seeing what you come back with.

Hi

Me to

Peter

[middenmess]

Re: Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

Hi

Me to

Peter

Succinct

[Guest]

Re: Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

Hello again jumper

I really do think that you ought to change your frame of mind set to your particular case, for I wholly believe that you do have a defence that is not only recognized in law, it[is] a defence that is complete in law and does undermine the claimant's cause of action in its entirety.

You were not and are not the contract breaker in these circumstances, the creditor himself has caused the damage to him and his unjust actions have swept the ground from underneath his feet and left no ground available for him to step forth upon and succeed with his claim.

I have posted on this subject (defective DN/repudiation/regulated Credit Agreement) on another forum and many cases/threads of this type, this particular subject will need to be determined on a case by case basis as there are going to be different circumstances/series of events involved with each case.

A one shoe size fits all simply will not suffice to ensure that justice is sufficiently served.

I have a case in Court today based on arguments put forward by me that are being used in the defence against a creditor who repudiated on the agreement/contract, I am very hopeful of a successful conclusion for the defendant and when they email me with the result, I shall post up the result (with their consent of course).

Peter, with respect, I wholly disagree with your argument, that is, a defective DN extinguishes the termination/ending of the agreement even if both parties to the said agreement have agreed that it is ended.

Anyway, jumper, you can defend this action, all you need do is state the facts (the series of events) of how you tried to make up for the missed payments, the creditor refused, the creditor had no grounds to end the agreement/contract as you clearly indicated that it was your intention to remain bound to the agreement/contract, the creditor, by his unjust actions clearly indicated that he did not.

I hope that helps you somewhat.

Kind Regards

Godzilla

Hi
Didnt want to get drawn into this argument again but just for clarity.

Yes i am saying that the faulty default extiguishes the right to termiante.
But even if i am wrong, you i believe are after an unlawuful termination in order to claim repudiation of contract. This is not possible as the creditor may termiate the greement at any time as is well established. If you accept this lawful termination you are in affect agreing that the agreement is lawfuly ended so the court will just assign the liabilities under the contract to the orriginal party as per rescission as remedy.

But as i say it would not get that far.

Peter

[Godzilla]

Re: Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

Hi
Didnt want to get drawn into this argument again but just for clarity.

Yes i am saying that the faulty default extiguishes the right to termiante.
But even if i am wrong, you i believe are after an unlawuful termination in order to claim repudiation of contract. This is not possible as the creditor may termiate the greement at any time as is well established. If you accept this lawful termination you are in affect agreing that the agreement is lawfuly ended so the court will just assign the liabilities under the contract to the orriginal party as per rescission as remedy.

But as i say it would not get that far.

Peter

Hello Peter

No, I am not arguing 'unlawful termination'. Also, just to clarify my position, I simply stated that I wholly disagree with what you have stated on this particular subject, I have not invited you to argue with me, nor have I made any attempt to embroil or entangle you into any such argument.

All things are practically debatable (obvious statement, I know), but especially matters of law, why, even if a precedent has stood for 4 or 5 hundred years or more, that does not mean that it cannot be argued against, something new can and will always come along and change the ruling/decision.

Common law does so co-exist alongside acts of Parliament, the common law of contracts co-exists alongside the CCA 1974 (as amended) and as a matter of common justice, the Courts must look to that said common law and the principles thereof in circumstances such as the subject of this thread.

I of course am not introducing something new as far as the common law of contracts is concerened, on the contrary, I am relying on the remedies available to a non-breaching party to a contract under those said principles that have established what is just and what is not in these such circumstances.

Thank you, the defence rests.

Kind Regards to all (and that does include you Peter)

Godzilla

[WendyB]

Re: Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

Hello again jumper



A one shoe size fits all simply will not suffice to ensure that justice is sufficiently served.

I have a case in Court today based on arguments put forward by me that are being used in the defence against a creditor who repudiated on the agreement/contract, I am very hopeful of a successful conclusion for the defendant and when they email me with the result, I shall post up the result (with their consent of course).




Godzilla

Perhaps Jumper should wait and see what the outcome of that case is before he decides whether to defend, on what grounds etc?

Only you can decide which way forward to take Jumper, gather all the facts and arguments etc then take it from there. It may be just the principle of the thing but principles don't pay the bills - or the court costs should things not go your way.

Just my opinion.....

[jumper999]

Re: Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

Good advice GZ and I agree with all you say.

I suppose at the end of the day it will be up to the court to decide in whose favor things should go. The courts are not there to take sides and I think that people have a great fear of going to them, but they are there to listen to what has happened, why it happened and how things could have been resolved prior to court proceedings.

Who is/was the unreasonable party etc etc. For arguments sake if I do get a CCJ then it won't be the end of the world or will it? Have the laws changed about people who get a CCJ against and has been confirmed that life is over after a CCJ and this info has not been made public yet?

Sorry, but it does make me laugh at times when the things that people, lenders and just weirdo's in general can get away with whatever they can.

I think that the lenders will try and get away with whatever they can for as long as they can until there will be a time, when I don't know but until there is a stop made to it. Any chance of that happening in my lifetime is not foreseeable, maybe in the next generation.


Peter thank you for putting your comments forward, you give us a chance and a taste of what we have to come.

[WendyB]

Re: Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

oh yes, forgot to ask, Godzilla - how did it all go with Sainsburys? Don't think you ever updated us?

You also said in your post #36 that you have a case in Court today - in what capacity is it "yours" ?

regards

Wends

[jumper999]

Re: Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

Perhaps Jumper should wait and see what the outcome of that case is before he decides whether to defend, on what grounds etc?

Only you can decide which way forward to take Jumper, gather all the facts and arguments etc then take it from there. It may be just the principle of the thing but principles don't pay the bills - or the court costs should things not go your way.

Just my opinion.....

Thanks WendyB,

I am not sure how I would do that as HSBC have issued a claim and on what grounds or reason could I put this matter on hold until the Brandon case finishes.

I know one person who placed their case on hold due to the Heath case and when Heath lost so did this person.

If I do request HSBC put a hold until the Brandon case I would be admitting that my judgment more or less relies on the verdict that will come from his case but my case and the particulars of it have nothing to do with the Brandon case and I do not want to pin my hope on his appeal on 6 Dec 10.

Hope I have made sense?