phoenix O/H v HSBC

[thephoenix]

Re: phoenix O/H v HSBC

I have used the draft from AL59 PPI Claim - Natwest and amended to suit.

Will send this to D&G and a variation of it to the courts. If anyone feels as though I should add a bit more, feel free to do so. :okay:




I acknowledge receipt of the N24 Notice dated 1st November 2007.

I note that you intend to apply for a set aside of the judgment granted on 15th October 2007.

I will state now that I will raise no objection to your application provided that it is made with liberty to restore and dependent upon my receiving all documents (including any experts report) on which you intend to rely on at the final hearing, as stated on the Notice of Allocation dated 21st July 2007 no later than 14 days before the date of the final hearing and to file a copy of the same with the Court.

Kindly therefore let me have all you documents you intend to rely on at the final hearing directly as well as filing your copy with the court.

I look forward to your reply.

[thephoenix]

Re: phoenix O/H v HSBC

for those of you who are post hopping, this will be sent to the court:

The claimant acknowledges receipt of the Set Aside hearing notice dated 1st November 2007.


The claimant states that she will raise no objection to the defendants application, provided that it is made with liberty to restore and dependent upon my receiving all documents (including any experts report) on which the defendants intend to rely on at the final hearing, as stated on the Notice of Allocation dated 21st July 2007. The claimant requests that these documents are submitted to all parties no later than 14 days before the date of the final hearing. A notice of the same has been sent to the defendants

The claimant is mindfull of the courts time and respectfully requests that the set aside hearing be discharged in light of this letter and to consider the set aside application on it's own merits.

Therefore, if the courts agree that Civil Procedure Rule 27.11 (3) (a+b) is applicable, then the claimant requests a final hearing date to be set. If however, the court wishes to progress this claim on it's original judgment, the claimants has no objections.

I look forward to your reply.

[thephoenix]

Re: phoenix O/H v HSBC

ahhhhhhhh the time has come, any pointers on a whiteness statement would be greatfully received. No notice from the courts as yet, been trying the courts but keep being put through to different dept who don't answer the phone...aaarrrggghhhhhh

I will put one together by the middle of next week.

[thephoenix]

Re: phoenix O/H v HSBC

received order yesterday, it reads (word for word)

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. Judgmenty be and is set aside
2. The matter be listed for hearing on 30th January 2008 at a time not before 12.00 midday at ********* county court. Est 3Hrs
3. Unless the defendant complies with the directions as to service of documents and statements by 10th December 2007 the defence be and is struck out.

Date order made: 12th Novemer 2007
Order drwan: 23rd November 2007

[thephoenix]

Re: phoenix O/H v HSBC

received order yesterday, it reads (word for word)

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. Judgmenty be and is set aside
2. The matter be listed for hearing on 30th January 2008 at a time not before 12.00 midday at ********* county court. Est 3Hrs
3. Unless the defendant complies with the directions as to service of documents and statements by 10th December 2007 the defence be and is struck out.

Date order made: 12th Novemer 2007
Order drwan: 23rd November 2007

Well the above info has turned up today. Same rubbish they sent before. Al centres around the branch appointments for the signing of the documents.
The point of this claim is to establish the 'POINT OF SALE' techniques used in the 'SALE' of the PPI. Again, they have failed to supply a transcript or recording of that POINT OF SALE telephone conversation.
I need some serious pointers on the best way to go with this pleaseeeee.
Either some smart persuasive talking to the DJ or get there defence struck out?????

[thephoenix]

Re: phoenix O/H v HSBC

time is fast approaching and i feel as though she is gonna bottle it AGAIN!!!! ARRRGGGHHHH sometime I do wonder why i bother.

anyway's, best course of action guys and gals????

Another summary judgment request with SOE???

Any suggestions welcomed with warm arms

[thephoenix]

Re: phoenix O/H v HSBC

time is fast approaching and i feel as though she is gonna bottle it AGAIN!!!! ARRRGGGHHHH sometime I do wonder why i bother.

anyway's, best course of action guys and gals????

Another summary judgment request with SOE???

Any suggestions welcomed with warm arms

arrrgggghhhhh Looks like this one is gonna be in the hands of the gods again aarrrrggghhhhhhh

Some constructive comments on the letter below would be good ......fankooooo


I as claimant would respectfully request the court, to enter summary judgment in the following claim, No.7LE02428, due to be heard at Leicester County Court, on 30th January not before 12.00 midday.
The original judgment on 15th October 2007, in favor of the claimant was set-aside due non attendance and failing to submit evidence by the defendant.
Due to personal health reasons, I as claimant, am unable to attend the hearing, and wish evidence to be considered in my absence.

All evidence I wish to rely on has been submitted to the Court, and served on the Defendant, on the 18TH & 17th of September 2007, respectively.

A copy of my statement of evidence is attached for ease of reference.

[Amy]

Re: phoenix O/H v HSBC

Why do you want to go for Summary Judgment?

[thephoenix]

Re: phoenix O/H v HSBC

Hiya, it's just a copy of the original letter sent to the courts for the original hearing. apart from the reference to the set aside.

I believe that pursuant to CPR 24.2(a)(ii) the defendant has no real prospect of of successfully defending the claim due to non submittal of vital evidence. IMO

[thephoenix]

Re: phoenix O/H v HSBC

update:

DJ dismissed the claim

He say's on the balance of probabilities and having read all papers in case it was dismissed on the following points:

1) not satisfied the contract happened during the telephone application. The telephone application was an offer to lend. Total crap..... the telephone application was an agreement between parties ie point of sale.

2) He is satisfied the contract was made during the signing meeting with the defendants. Signing was just a formality, point of sale had already taken place.

3) Defendant acted in line with banks procedures in explaining the PPI policy. Irrelevant, no PPI no loan, thats what was said during point of sale.

4) Satifsfied correct documents were issued by the bank on completion of the loan. Irrelevant, that was never in question
.
5) SYS CCA 74 not cause of action but provided a remedy where where a cause of action had arisen. well that cleared that one up

6)Not satisfied documents filed by claimant disclose any proper cause of action against the defedant. this was never about a point of LAW. This was about facts and procedure. All we could rely on was OFT reports and FSA guidelines. Oh and the claimant having the balls to turn up and argue the case.

7) DJ bears in mind the events on which rthe claim is made all occured in july 2002. No contemporaneous records exist and recollections are hazy. well if he had bothered to read the FSA handbook, all records should be keep for as long as is necessary to satisfy the completion of agreement. So a 5 year agreement should have all records available for at least 5 years. IMHO

8) Not satisfied about claimants state of mind during the time of application.



so, got to go and fetch kids now.... I'm late. but they are the full reasons

FSA complaint I think

[thephoenix]

Re: phoenix O/H v HSBC

In addition to this, if EX had gone to the hearing i believe she would have convinced the DJ otherwise. Some of what he said is irrelevant to this case and the rest could of been argued. She ain't that bothered, so I wasted my time for the past year on this .
Plus, a request was issued in January of last year to cancel the PPI part of the agreement..... Have they canceled it? have they ******y. They continue to present the payment request to the inactive account cuz they wont cancel and allow ex to pay them any other way.
FOS I think, judgment was given to either party, claim was dismissed so does that count as a ruling on this case?? If it is them FOS will not entertain it

update:

DJ dismissed the claim

He say's on the balance of probabilities and having read all papers in case it was dismissed on the following points:

1) not satisfied the contract happened during the telephone application. The telephone application was an offer to lend. Total crap..... the telephone application was an agreement between parties ie point of sale.

2) He is satisfied the contract was made during the signing meeting with the defendants. Signing was just a formality, point of sale had already taken place.

3) Defendant acted in line with banks procedures in explaining the PPI policy. Irrelevant, no PPI no loan, thats what was said during point of sale.

4) Satifsfied correct documents were issued by the bank on completion of the loan. Irrelevant, that was never in question
.
5) SYS CCA 74 not cause of action but provided a remedy where where a cause of action had arisen. well that cleared that one up

6)Not satisfied documents filed by claimant disclose any proper cause of action against the defedant. this was never about a point of LAW. This was about facts and procedure. All we could rely on was OFT reports and FSA guidelines. Oh and the claimant having the balls to turn up and argue the case.

7) DJ bears in mind the events on which rthe claim is made all occured in july 2002. No contemporaneous records exist and recollections are hazy. well if he had bothered to read the FSA handbook, all records should be keep for as long as is necessary to satisfy the completion of agreement. So a 5 year agreement should have all records available for at least 5 years. IMHO

8) Not satisfied about claimants state of mind during the time of application.



so, got to go and fetch kids now.... I'm late. but they are the full reasons

FSA complaint I think

[thephoenix]

Re: phoenix O/H v HSBC

Update..... done and dusted IMO

She's dealing with it now so I don't care.