Court claim issued by HSBC on a faulty DN & TN

[scoobydoo]

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

It seems to me that there is immediate inequality as soon as we enter a "contract" with these financial instituations. They can agree to help those in financial difficulty and to act in a fair manner - but if they renenge on this written agreement then the consumer has very little recourse because of the financial risks involved in taking on their expert team of legal advisors, who are already in place to defend their arguments.

The FOS have been of assistance in some cases but on the whole the consumer feels that when they are signing a credit agreement it is very biased towards the FI institution and the consequences of unforseen circumstances can be life changing for the individual but an insignificant drop in the ocean for the bank.

Would it not be better if a small amount each year was paid 50/50 by the banks and the consumers on each and every bank account in the country ,to an independant firm of expert financial lawyers who could act for the consumers with no risk of costs. Any excess funds would be diverted to a credible charity for say those affected by mental illness caused by financial stress.

[pt2537]

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

MBNA ? cool, are we able to see it?

no sorry the Link Financial one where the court said the agreement was irredeemably unenforceable

[scoobydoo]

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

Hi

did not mean to hijack your thread - my post was really just a long winded way of saying I totally sympathise with your predicament of even having to make the decsion of whether to proceed or not.

the imbalance needs to be evened out. IMO LOL

[jumper999]

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

Just like to thank all for their support.

Hope I can sort this mess out soon.

[Godzilla]

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

Hello jumper

How are you doing?

So jumper, you were (still are I hope) going to defend this claim, are you able to say out here in public what you were going to say in your defence?

Come back, 10-4

Kind Regards

Godzilla

[jumper999]

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

Hello jumper

How are you doing?

So jumper, you were (still are I hope) going to defend this claim, are you able to say out here in public what you were going to say in your defence?

Come back, 10-4

Kind Regards

Godzilla

Yes I was gong to say,

Take my house, take my OH, take everything I have but please don't take away my freedom to bank with HSBC.....pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease!

No sorry, just trying to unwind a bit. To be honest my mind has gone completely blank and I don't even drink or take drugs, so that is not a good sign is it?

If I could say what I wanted out in public I am sure they would bring an act in to stop me.

I am still going to see what is the best way forward. If I make an offer and HSBC refuse as I have no reason at all from experience that they will, then they will still take me to court.

If they agree the I will keep continuing to pay them until my teeth drop out, and now that they have raised the pension age, I don't know if I'll last that long.

I am in a catch 22 position once again, I am like the dog chasing it's own tail. I am ostrich that thinks it can fly.

Joking aside I am still waiting to see what peter has to say to the reply I gave to him.

[Godzilla]

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

Jumper old boy

Have you tried to communicate with the claimant's Solicitors to inform them of that defective default notice and the effort undertaken by you to make up for those missed payments, but how the claimant refused you with his extemely unreasonable conduct.

The definition of a Default? Failure to repay a loan! You did not fail to honour the agreement/contract, a simply breach of one of the terms of the said agreement, minor, partial non-performance by you and only for a very short period, such a simply and minor breach as this does not cut through to the root of the agreement/contract and you made a great effort to bring the arrears up to date, you gave no indication that you no longer intended to be bound to the contract and you certainly did not fail to honour the contract.

The creditor repudiated at a time when there was available to him another option, he chose by his unreasonable and unjust actions to ignore what was quite clearly a viable option, this case [is] a fundamental breach of the contract that does so cut right through and indeed in half the very root of the contract, in these circumstances, it is the creditor himself who is the contract breaker.

Jumper, come back, Roger-over.

Kind Regards

Godzilla
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

Yes I was gong to say,

Take my house, take my OH, take everything I have but please don't take away my freedom to bank with HSBC.....pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease!

No sorry, just trying to unwind a bit. To be honest my mind has gone completely blank and I don't even drink or take drugs, so that is not a good sign is it?

If I could say what I wanted out in public I am sure they would bring an act in to stop me.

I am still going to see what is the best way forward. If I make an offer and HSBC refuse as I have no reason at all from experience that they will, then they will still take me to court.

If they agree the I will keep continuing to pay them until my teeth drop out, and now that they have raised the pension age, I don't know if I'll last that long.

I am in a catch 22 position once again, I am like the dog chasing it's own tail. I am ostrich that thinks it can fly.

Joking aside I am still waiting to see what peter has to say to the reply I gave to him.

Oh there you are old boy.

What reply are you referring to?

Yes, insane, absolutely! When you did your AOS, did you say that you do not accept the claim?

Kind Regards

Godzilla

[pt2537]

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

Jumper old boy

Have you tried to communicate with the claimant's Solicitors to inform them of that defective default notice and the effort undertaken by you to make up for those missed payments, but how the claimant refused you with his extemely unreasonable conduct.

The definition of a Default? Failure to repay a loan! You did not fail to honour the agreement/contract, a simply breach of one of the terms of the said agreement, minor, partial non-performance by you and only for a very short period, such a simply and minor breach as this does not cut through to the root of the agreement/contract and you made a great effort to bring the arrears up to date, you gave no indication that you no longer intended to be bound to the contract and you certainly did not fail to honour the contract.

The creditor repudiated at a time when there was available to him another option, he chose by his unreasonable and unjust actions to ignore what was quite clearly a viable option, this case [is] a fundamental breach of the contract that does so cut right through and indeed in half the very root of the contract, in these circumstances, it is the creditor himself who is the contract breaker.

Jumper, come back, Roger-over.

Kind Regards

Godzilla
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------


Oh there you are old boy.

What reply are you referring to?

Yes, insane, absolutely! When you did your AOS, did you say that you do not accept the claim?

Kind Regards

Godzilla

I really am struggling to follow this reasoning, HHJ Roderick Denyer QC gave a judgment sitting as a Judge of the High Court of Justice, which removes the invalid default notice argument.

If you do not get 14 days, then it causes no problem for the lender on the back of Brandon vs Amex.

So the defective default cannot act as a Defence, the words of HHJ Denyer

so, you are going to struggle with this i fear

Also, it is open to the creditor to refuse to accept payment of a smaller sum in consideration of a larger sum, see Re Selectmove and also Lord Dennings judgment in the High Trees case

[jumper999]

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

Thanks GZ, Everything you said I have done and more with no success.

I kept in touch with the DCA's and HSBC every step of the way and never did I receive any sympathy or help.

I hear that there is not much use fighting on the faulty DN due to the Brandon case but then again I do hear many other things too LOL,

Makes you wonder at times why we don't all just live outside Tesco's in a box............

[jumper999]

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

Lat time I checked I was not an old boy GZ LOL! but you can call me that if you wish.

PT, you know your stuff and I appreciate your words of advice and warning. Like I said I really do not know what to do. Yes the creditor can refuse a smaller payment in consideration of a larger payment, but where the bloody hell were we suppose to know something like prior to signing our souls away.

If had been written in our agreement something like:

IF FOR ANY REASON IN THE FUTURE YOU SUFFER ANY KIND OF FINANCIAL DIFFICULTY WHETHER IT WAS YOUR OWN DOING OR NOT, AND IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO PAY THE MINIMUM SUM REQUIRED JUST TO INFORM YOU THAT WE DO NOT HAVE TO ACCEPT ANY SMALLER OFFERED BY YOU

AND BY THE WAY THERE IS NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT THIS. THANK YOU NOW SIGN HERE IF YOU STILL WANT TO BE LEGALLY BOUND BY OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

How many of us would have taken out agreements? No excuse I know but makes you think hey?

[Lord_Alcohol]

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

I really am struggling to follow this reasoning, HHJ Roderick Denyer QC gave a judgment sitting as a Judge of the High Court of Justice, which removes the invalid default notice argument.

If you do not get 14 days, then it causes no problem for the lender on the back of Brandon vs Amex.

So the defective default cannot act as a Defence, the words of HHJ Denyer

so, you are going to struggle with this i fear

Also, it is open to the creditor to refuse to accept payment of a smaller sum in consideration of a larger sum, see Re Selectmove and also Lord Dennings judgment in the High Trees case

PT, I consider your words to be definitive at all times, but I am confused! When I read ss 87 and 88, which say;

87(1) - Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a " default notice ") is necessary....

88(1) The default notice must be in the prescribed form and specify...

...I am persuaded that the creditor must do these things in order to obtain his entitlements. For example, the Act does not state; is necessary unless no prejudice is suffered by the debtor...

Reading Brandon, the judge believed that no prejudice was suffered by the debtor as Amex did not take any action until after the 14 days, and in any case the Amex contract seemed to override the need for a DN through inclusion of a term that provided for immediate termination at any time.

IMHO, I firmly believe that the judge was utterly wrong on this, as what is to say that any creditor would refuse to accept payment of arrears as remedy after the 14 days? The creditor could merely say that he "took no action", causing the debt to be enforced even where the DN offered a couple of days. To me this is a gross breach of CCA and of the principles upon which it was based (in partic. "conusmer protection").

Is this really a hopeless defence?

Cheers
LA

[pt2537]

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

I agree the judge was wrong

But, we are really stuck with this judgment, as it stands

[Guest]

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

Hello again jumper

I stated that I would post up the result of a case that was in Court today that I had presented argument for the defendant to use against the claim brought by the creditor.

I have spoken with the defendant in the said case (a very good friend of mine) and he has given his consent to me to post here some of the details to his case.

Firstly, I just want to say, Peter Bard eat your heart out, or if you don't have one, eat those socks you found under the tree.

Tried and tested argument - result = successful. The case has been adjourned today (by agreement between the two parties).

Back in the summer this year, my very good friend contacted and asked for some help on his case as the claimant had made an application for Summary Judgment against his initial defence to the claimant's claim.

The hearing for SJ was just three (3) days away, I went through some of the documents to the case that my friend had sent me and in that bundle was a particular document that my friend had not realized the importance of.

I very quickly provided my friend with powerful legal argument based on this one particular document and also furnished him with the relevant CPR to use in order to submit the document in as evidence to substantiate his defence.

On the day of the hearing (SJ hearing) counsel for the claimant tried to go for a walk in the park and was having a nice easy day, my friend had served the said document to the claimant on the day I informed him of the importance of it, the claimant ignored the document and the argument that I sent along with it.

So just as the claimant was attempting to wrap the claim up, my friend spoke up and disclosed the said document in Court, counsel tried it on saying far too late and the Judge was about to agree when my friend mentioned the relevant CPR that permitted disclosure of this extremely important document, the claimant's said appl for SJ FAILED at that point and proceedings were adjourned until today.

My friend has counsel representing him now and his legal rep is specialized in consumer law issues and all the complexities thereof, counsel for the defence (my friend) is using the arguments put forward by me against the claim and is attempting to persuade the claimant that he should discontinue with his action and abandon it altogether. As I have said at the begining of this post, the matter was adjourned by agreement today and I shall post further on this case the moment it is concluded.

As far as Brandon case is concerened, the said case has changed absolutely nothing, in fact, the Brandon case may have only set a precedent that might apply to consumers/debtors who have accounts/loans with Amex.

Peter the only thing that you are absolutely correct on is - Yes I post on CAG under the name 'The Mould', you could not contend with me there, there is no difference here, Peter Bard in my opinion you are a scaremonger.

More on this case to follow soon, jumper sorry to hyjack, however, I do know how important and relevant this case is to your own case.

Kind Regards to all.

Godzilla

Certainly showed me

Case ajourned

Pants
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
As far as Brandon case is concerened, the said case has changed absolutely nothing, in fact, the Brandon case may have only set a precedent that might apply to consumers/debtors who have accounts/loans with Amex.


?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????

More Pants

[Angry Cat]

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

WHOOOOO HOOOOO

Ive been trying to advocate this approach for months

Embarrased defences dont work, short term they may, but how sad will you feel when the opponents apply for costs as a result. I have a few sad clients who didnt like being ordered to pay average of £3k costs as a result of embarrassed Defences

Absolutely agree!

And in fact, alerted the site team to same a few months ago.

[Guest]

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

The hearing for SJ was just three (3) days away, I went through some of the documents to the case that my friend had sent me and in that bundle was a particular document that my friend had not realized the importance of.

I very quickly provided my friend with powerful legal argument based on this one particular document and also furnished him with the relevant CPR to use in order to submit the document in as evidence to substantiate his defence.


Sounds like an episode of Dick Tracy anyone know what he means