Update since last post - My life has been ripped apart. My wife of 22 yrs left me although for another man (thats a technical term for a tw*t) the pressure that I/We have been under from HSBC has played a significant part in our marriage breakdown. Anyway she left me in May this year and although it nearly killed me I am over it now. I was off work with depression for five months and have only just returned. But there was a possibilty that I would not have returned to work at all because some of our children chose to stay with me. I had previously offered HSBC £1200 (the cost of filing bancruptcy for us both) in Nov 2010 and they rejected the offer. I owed them £1900 plus on the balance of account at the time they closed it. They were claiming about £25,000 inclusive of interest and court costs. When they could not get a response from my wife (even though they had her address) they asked me to make another offer. I told them that the Managed Loan was DEAD and that I would not negotiate on it but agreed that I did owe them some money on the balance of account, but it included charges, interest, and account fees that I would deduct from the balance. I ended up that I owed them £1300 approx and I offered them £800 cash as a 'one off full and final settlement- without prejudice' and they accepted. I call that a result!

Update - Not gone to court yet - no date given. Question- On the Claimants POC at the very end should be a statement of truth - How should the Claimant word this please?

I already have the evidence -provided in writing by the bank staff admitting that they failed to pay off one of the loans, that was to be included in the considation loan.

Well the loan was to consolidate the other four into one managable payment but only three got paid off by HSBC leaving money in the account unbeknown to us. Now I feel that the HSBC has failed in its duties?

Update. Waiting for a court date. Got a question though; If a managed loan agreement was set up to pay off? 1. Personal account 2. Personal loan 3. Business account 4. Business loan The loan goes through and then the bank fails to pay off one of four above leaving the said funds in the account, then unknowingly this money gets used up by the account holder before it is noticed either by account holder or the bank. Could the bank be held responsible for failure in obligation of its duties and or breach of contract?

I prefer old one too!

Just want to see if there is any hope?

I wont negotiate loan agreement. Account balance is about same as filing BR. Offered that - Not worried by BR nothing left to come for.

Update- Legal aid only available for first consultation. No other way of obtaining a barrister other than paying myself- Thats a non-starter. Told banks Solicitors that I will file for bancruptcy should I lose in court. They replied that their client wishes to go to court. Thats their loss either way I feel.

Yes Kenny, I too would like to know when and where we are up to with the case itself?

£1 or £10 count me in.

Hi SFU, Cost to defend £20k - so that's out of the question. Got AQ to fill in - going to ask for time to see if we can negotiate. Hoping to convince them that even if we lose they wont get back what they are after. No House to take, no assets and if I do lose both of us will file for bankruptcy. Basically even if they win it will be a pyrrhic victory. They wont even recover costs- and I will be out of their debt in essence after 1 year. Not worried about not be able to have credit- cos not had credit these last three years and never will do.

Received the AQ. Got an appointment with solicitors to defend us. Got an asset that we can sell to fund our defence. As long as it doesn't exceed £7k to fund our defence. Figured we might as well use it in our defence because if we lose as a Lit then they will come after it when we have lost? So might as well use the £7k asset to try to win- rather than lose by cheap-skating our defence. This way it gives us a better chance of winning. Should we then lose the asset we had goes to the people who defended us rather than the claimant who will find that they have won but will never realistically get back what they are after.

Would I be right in thinking that as the bank has stated in their POC that the agreement is unexecuted from its inception - therefore conditions that would apply to a properly executed agreement would not actually apply until the agreement was enforced? Interest, default, selling on of agreement, demanding payment?????

just spoken with the enemy; Gotta say they seemed helpful- worryingly (got this image in my head of me swimming alongside a White Shark!). LOL. Advised me to put in a defence with as much detail as possible (it can be added or amended they said) and add an explanation of how the account got the way it was. They haven't ruled out coming to some agreement:) So I am going to answer all the points in their POC for now, add a chronological explanation of account. Might just dispute signatures- rather than just mine? Thoughts please.

thanks SFU. Will do.

Might have a way I can get professional help but not before I have to file a defence.

Rhodium, SFU, And gh- Thank you. Spoke with the court yesterday- Told them I was waiting for info from Claimant which was delaying me from putting in my defence and that the agreement enclosed in their POC was not what the Claimant sent me when i sent them a CCA1974 s.77-79 request. Court told me to put in what I had got and to mention about the documents and that I can make amendments later. Going to try to speak to the 'enemy' today to see what or who I will be up against- Solicitor or Barrister. Also just to let them know that neither MOH or I have any assets to come after, no house, savings, yacht, villa in Florida, in fact nowt, and that any victory for them will unlikely ever see them recovering even their costs. I am going to try to track down the bank staff who were at face to face meeting to see if they can be of any help. At least two of them know that I have protested that its not my signature. Surely the counsel for the claimant are aware of this and will be expecting me to raise this issue? Just want to clarify for all- that MOH signed the agreement (there was only one agreement drawn up) and she signed it in our own home with no witness present. No signatures were done in the bank. The bank admit in their POC that their staff dated the agreement in the box where our signatures SHOULD be. One of you mentioned duty of care- Would that not extend to checking a signature on an agreement? The Bank staff were very uncomforable when we asked -"shouldnt the signatures have been verified"? Because of my job it is difficult to get anything done either today or tomorrow. I do obviously as this post shows have internet access- but making and receiving calls are a distraction that I dont need. Although I am expecting a phone call this morning from a legal firm via my union. I know that you all want me to get proper counsel and yes I would like that too. But I cant afford to pay for it. Since 2007 I have never tried to get anything on credit and I wont start that again now. If I lose they cant take away my home and MOH has no job she has enough to do looking after the 5 children and me. They can only take what we can afford to pay. I will, with your kind help (please) defend myself and MOH if its explained to me in laymans terms I will do my best. The Judge will not expect me to know the law 'word for word' but if I can demonstrate an understanding I am positive that he/she will not let me be taken advantage of- in fact I will ask say that 'i expect them not to show me any favour, but also not to let me be taken advantage of, by a learnered counsel. Hopefully there will be a new angle on the bank charges and I can screw them the way they have me- with interest- compounded-beyond 6 years-just like before. Have spoken with their Solicitors- will be up against Barrister- Told them to speak to the bank staff re the complications and complete mess of how my account has been run. Going to speak again on Thursday when I am at home. Also told them that I had written to them regarding details of agreements that they sent me when I CCA requeted them 3 years ago.

Correct Gh. 104 x 4 weekly is the same as 96 x 12 monthly. But I am not sure that they have picked up on it- extract from POC. As an act of indulgence towards the Defendants, on or about 26 February 2004, the claimant agreed to accept repayment by way 104 4 weekly instalments of XXX (as opposed to the 96 monthly instalments which the defendants agreed to repay). For the avoidance of doubt the result of this indulgence was not to alter the 8 year repayment period or the APR of 14.8%. The Defendants were simply permitted to repay the loan amount in slightly smaller, more frequent, instalments. As such there was no modifying agreement within the meaning of s.82(2) of the CCA1974. The sentence in red above - are they suggesting that there has been a modification? but it was meant to be a modification?

HSBC Bank Robbem Blind Charges-r-good England' 17th Feb 2004 Dear Mr Fiddled, Please find enclosed forms for a managed loan....Could I ask you to sign the forms where annotated and return to us. You may note that the form stipulates monthly payments, however we can amend this to make four weekly payments as Mr Fiddled salary is due. There you are amend before its signed it can be amended. Letter dated 17/02/2004 Bank signed their part of agreement 16/02/2004 Agreement dated 'on our behalf by bank 26/02/2004. Bank claims (in POC) offer of 4 weekly payments was made on or about 26/02/2004. Question - How many days is on or about. Isn't this just a smokescreen so that it would appear that the offer of 4 weekly payments was made after we had signed.

I will PM the letter after 6pm.

1. Yes 2. At home- wife handed it in at branch. 3 See 1. Just one other thing. The agreement was signed by the bank 16/2 and they sent it to us with an accompaning letter dated 17/2. The letter asked us to sign and that the payment dates could be altered to 4 weekly to coincide with pay days. Question- Why send out an agreement for me to sign if they are offering different payment terms. Why not wait for a reply and then draw up a new agreement with the new terms on them. With this in mind in their POC they called the altering of the terms 'as an act of indulgence to me' on or about the 26/2- yet it was actually offered 9 nine days earlier. The 26/2 was the latest date the agreement could be signed so that the first payment could be taken on 26/3. I believe that they are trying to hide the fact that the agreement was already being amended before it had even been signed. Does this matter?

Making payments on time - in line with the agreement? what if the bank takes the payments at a different time than is on the agreement thus incurring charges. Would this invalidate a default notice?

two questions. Is a 'Demand for payment' a DN default notice? To comply with a default notice the bank would have to list dates of payments missed? yes? I am assuming that 'yes' is your reply; therefore can payments be regarded as missed if the bank has tried to take them at a time other than specified in an agreement?

I already have a list of charges already compiled in my personal claim from 2001 to 2007.