Tweet
Re: As V Hsbc Personal Account
To Barnet County Court
Cc DG Solicitors
Claim No: xxxxxxxxx
Mr T v HSBC Bank
Dear Sirs
I have received a copy of a letter from the Defendant's solicitors in this case which was sent to the court on 15th January 2010 in which they invite the court to dismiss the claim.
I contend that the recent Supreme Court ruling did not cover all issues contained within the Particulars of Claim.
In the Defendants solicitors letter they state ''We note that the Claimant has challenged informal overdraft charges on two grounds, namely that: (a) they constitute penalties at common law; and (b) they are unfair under Regulation 5(1) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 ("UTCCRs") on the basis that they are too high. As has now been definitively determined, neither of these two challenges is open to the Claimant"
However my claim does not solely rely on the level of the fees, in my original claim I have stated ''3(b) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999) '' and I submit that this is the case, with regards to issues other than the level of the fees, as I will detail in my amended Particulars of Claim. Additionally my original claim does not make reference to Regulation 5(1) nor 6(2)b of the UTCCRs.
As Claimant in this case I respectfully request that this case be heard upon its own merits and evidence presented to the Court and I respectfully request that the court grants permission for me to amend my Particulars of Claim to take the Supreme Courts recent Judgment into account with regards penalties and expand on my claim that the relevant terms are unfair under the UTCCRs and introduce further arguments, and that the court issues directions to this end.
Regards
Mr Tuttsi
To Barnet County Court
Cc DG Solicitors
Claim No: xxxxxxxxx
Mr T v HSBC Bank
Dear Sirs
I have received a copy of a letter from the Defendant's solicitors in this case which was sent to the court on 15th January 2010 in which they invite the court to dismiss the claim.
I contend that the recent Supreme Court ruling did not cover all issues contained within the Particulars of Claim.
In the Defendants solicitors letter they state ''We note that the Claimant has challenged informal overdraft charges on two grounds, namely that: (a) they constitute penalties at common law; and (b) they are unfair under Regulation 5(1) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 ("UTCCRs") on the basis that they are too high. As has now been definitively determined, neither of these two challenges is open to the Claimant"
However my claim does not solely rely on the level of the fees, in my original claim I have stated ''3(b) The contractual provision that permits the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable by virtue of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999) '' and I submit that this is the case, with regards to issues other than the level of the fees, as I will detail in my amended Particulars of Claim. Additionally my original claim does not make reference to Regulation 5(1) nor 6(2)b of the UTCCRs.
As Claimant in this case I respectfully request that this case be heard upon its own merits and evidence presented to the Court and I respectfully request that the court grants permission for me to amend my Particulars of Claim to take the Supreme Courts recent Judgment into account with regards penalties and expand on my claim that the relevant terms are unfair under the UTCCRs and introduce further arguments, and that the court issues directions to this end.
Regards
Mr Tuttsi
Let us know.
Comment