Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individual

[Paule]

Re: Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individu

The barrister that will be assisting me is very, very capable, intellectual, he is a specialist, a professional

Can you clarify what you mean by 'assisting me'
Are they bringing the action for you, or just giving advice?

Can you also let us know, for reference, which case law(s) they are basing your case on as it may be helpful for others and I would be interested to read the cases to see if they are the same as the cases I have read up on.

PKea

[Godzilla]

Re: Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individu

Case law states, that if a creditor does not reject the offer of settlement swiftly, ie: The "Rejection" must be with-in a couple of days, and If the "Rejection" of the offer in settlement occurs prior to the banking of the cheque in settlement payment, the the creditor will have the right, legal right to pursue for the balance, but if a creditor accepts the cheque payment by banking the said cheque without informing the payer/debtor of their intentions and the said payment cheque is from a third party, then the paying-in of the cheque payment will be a "Clear and Uniquivocal" accepttance of the terms and will have signified discharge of the debt.



So the creditor must propell their intentions to the debtor/payer before the creditor banks a cheque payment that has been sent under the terms of it as being a settlement payment.


If the cheque is from a third party and banked by the creditor the debt wiil be legally extinguished and the debtor will be relieved of his/her indebtness to the creditor.



Many Thanks
Godzilla.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Yes EXC, I know, but many people thanked Luggerbugs for his post to this thread yesterday, I see that as a ganging-up on me, now that people know he was wrong,

there should be an apology, should there not?

Many Thanks
Godzilla.

[WendyB]

Re: Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individu

Case law states, that if a creditor does not reject the offer of settlement swiftly, ie: The "Rejection" must be with-in a couple of days, and If the "Rejection" of the offer in settlement occurs prior to the banking of the cheque in settlement payment, the the creditor will have the right, legal right to pursue for the balance, but if a creditor accepts the cheque payment by banking the said cheque without informing the payer/debtor of their intentions and the said payment cheque is from a third party, then the paying-in of the cheque payment will be a "Clear and Uniquivocal" accepttance of the terms and will have signified discharge of the debt.



So the creditor must propell their intentions to the debtor/payer before the creditor banks a cheque payment that has been sent under the terms of it as being a settlement payment.


If the cheque is from a third party and banked by the creditor the debt wiil be legally extinguished and the debtor will be relieved of his/her indebtness to the creditor.



Many Thanks
Godzilla.

I understand that, Godzilla, but can you tell me the actual case, and where to find it please, so that I can read it for myself to gain a better understanding of the way it is worded etc.. If you have a link that would be really useful to me.

Thanks.

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individu

Can I clarify if the cheque was written on a third party's account? ie Father in Law?

[Paule]

Re: Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individu

No, not quotes or your understandings. the ACTUAL cases you will be refering to.

ie
Hipgrave v Jones [2004] EWHC 2901 (QB)
Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’s NHS Trust ([2007] 1 AC 224)
Conn v Sunderland Council (CoA, 7 November 2007)

[Godzilla]

Re: Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individu

I am going to have a cup of tea, I will answer the unanswered questions soon as I can. I am just not as fast as all of you are, please be patient I will respond to all replies to this thread.

Many Thanks
Godzilla.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
OK if you all look-up in your search engines FULL AND FINAL SETTLEMENT- CASE LAW.

This should provide the answers, I do really want to have a cup of tea now, be back soon.

A lot of research I know, nonetheless that is where you will find the wordings.

Many Thanks
Godzilla.

[Amethyst]

Re: Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individu

Andrew Bracken and Ann Trickett v Graham Billinghurst [2003] - The Law – ‘Full and final settlement’ - Voltimum UK - Electrical Installation Products and Contracting

If part payment of the debt is made by a third party, a promise to accept a smaller sum in full satisfaction will be binding on the creditor (where the payment is made on the condition that the debtor is released from the obligation to pay the full amount). This is what occurred in Bracken case, the third party being Advanced Building Technology Ltd.

Do you have the full judgment notes for this case ?



Now the wording of the letter you did send with the cheque is important..would it be possible for me to post the relevant paragraph up excluding the amount and any address details.

[ROBSTER]

Re: Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individu

Robster,

Read the whole thread from the beginning and you will see why I am posting here!

The barrister that will be assisting me is very, very capable, intellectual, he is a specialist, a professional.

I hope that answers your questions.

Many Thanks
Godzilla.

Have I missed the bit that says you did have charges and have had them back or have you not been charged at all.

I am not a very capable, intellectual, specialist & professional barrister but in my humble opinion if you can additionally prove that the £1750 ish amount should not have been applied to the account in the first place it certainally would not hurt your case.

Hope this helps

[Amethyst]

Re: Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individu

No worries - its here - http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/j...llinghurst.htm


The third party aspect appears quite important. I am unsure however if the actual OFFEr needed to come from the third party or simply the cheque being made out from a third party covers that ? Can you clarify.

27. In Hirachand Punanchand and others v. Temple (1911) 2 KB page 330 C.A. the Court of Appeal upheld the defendant�s appeal against the judgment in favour of the plaintiffs at first instance. There Indian money lenders had advanced sums of monies to a young army officer against a promissory note and upon the security of a bond. He could not pay. The plaintiffs sought payment from his father who offered an amount less than the debt in full settlement of his son�s debts and enclosed a draft for that amount. The plaintiffs cashed the draft and retained the proceeds of the draft and brought an action against the debtor for the balance. Fletcher Moulton LJ at page 340 said:
"In the present case you are dealing with the question in respect of money paid by a third person. In such a case there is no difference between payment of the total amount and payment of a proportion of it only, so long as it is paid in settlement of the debt. If a third person steps in and gives consideration for the discharge of the debtor, it does not matter whether he does it in meal or in malt, or what proportion the amount given bears to the amount of the debt. Here the money was paid by a third person, and I have no doubt that, upon acceptance of that money by the claimants the full knowledge of the terms on which it was offered, the debt was absolutely extinguished".
CONCLUSION

5. Where a lesser sum is paid by someone else to discharge the debt, the creditor cannot then claim the amount unpaid from the original debtor: Hirachand Punamchand v Temple (1911).


So what consititutes acceptance where a third party is involved ?

[Paule]

Re: Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individu

OK if you all look-up in your search engines FULL AND FINAL SETTLEMENT- CASE LAW.

Hope you had a nice brew

No, I am asking YOU, what case law you are using in YOUR case.

What we may search may not be what you are refering to, or basing YOUR case on.

You said you have done all this research, so presumably you have you notes of where each quote comes from so you can refer to these in your court documents.

We are only trying to make sure you are fully prepared.
If you go into court with this blase attitude to the process, you wont even get a hearing as the HBOS team of sols will probably get it chucked out.

You need to back up your claims and you need the case law to do this.

PKea

[Paule]

Re: Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individu

Can you also confirm what case laws you are using for all the other claims you are bringing against HBOS, ie harrasment, fraud, etc as you mention in the beginning of the thread

Cheers

PKea

[WendyB]

Re: Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individu

For clarification, can I just ask (I may have missed it somewhere) was this debt for a bank account, overdraft, credit card or loan? As Robster said, if there are charges that can be offset, this would help your case.

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individu

21. Sainsbury's send response to my complaint denying ever receiving full and final settlement offer letter and blame me for their unlawful actions.


22. Sainsbury's send second letter one paragraph states that they told me that they would not accept settlement, the next paragraph stated that they did tell me that they would accept the settlement and that they did encourage me to send it in for consideration, and they accept that they should of rejected my offer but because the did not the the agree they should not of pursued me for the balance.

Still comments in this second letter implying that I am at fault and responsible for their actions.


23. Third response arrives, states sorry about that, here's a thousand pounds and good by and thank you for bringing these multiple failures from multiple departments to our attention.

This is the points that are of most interest to me. This tells me how they viewed the complaint. Their view is important to read.
Can these letters be sent to amethyst by PM please?
Thanks

[Godzilla]

Re: Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individu

Hello again, yes a very nice cup of tea, or a cup of nice tea, as the case might be.


OK, case law-"FULL AND FINAL SETTLEMENT". May I refer you to:

Stour Valley Builders V Stuart (1992).

Andrew Bracken and Ann Trickett V Graham Billinghurst (2003)


Ferguson V Davis- (I do not know the date). Court of Appeal- "Paying in and clearance of the cheque (is) a clear and uniquivocal acceptance".


Day V Mclea- (Victorian case).


The case law states that there must be a "Rejection" from the receiving party either before banking the payment stated as a settlement or Full and Final Payment or with-in a couple of days of the cheque having cleared, so there must be a "Rejection" in any case.


There are also many articles on Dispute and Resolution by solicitors of corporate law firms, which really, are warnings/cautions to creditors, as to how they should treat "Full and Final Settlements".


I hope this helps

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Sainsbury's Bank Plc(HBOS) And Four Debt Collection Companies Against An Individu

Day v. Mclean (1889)
A defendant sent a cheque for a lesser sum than that claimed for breach of contract "in full of all demands" and enclosed a receipt in that form for signature. The creditor instead sent a receipt "on account" and banked the cheque. The Court of Appeal held that there was no accord to bar the claim.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Ferguson v. Davis (1996)

More recently, the Court of Appeal has again approved the doctrine in the context of an open offer sought to be made by a defendant in "full and final" payment of a larger debt. (1)