I could be wrong but my take on the response from HSBC, when you read between the lines: We know these charges are wrong and we should refund them but we believe you do not have a change challenging them in court and therefore we are not going to refund them!”

My take on this is that most people will be more than happy to pay bank charges, if they were appropiate. The whole issue is the amount the banks are charging. They are getting "Money for Nothing". If I go overdrawn for a small amount for a small time frame and they charged me £3 (costing them 75p), then I would not complain! I am angry because they are pocketing £25 - 75p!!! Another issue is why do allow you to go over your limit?? There were many an occasion that I did my calculations and made Debit Card payments, authorised by the bank, just to find out later that an old Debit Card payment (authorised some time ago by the bank) were also been paid on that day and I went over the limit. Why did the bank authorise and allow the last Debit Card payment?? I believe it to be deliberate for their "Money for Nothing" policy. As I said, I will be more than happy to pay appropiate charges in appropiate circumstances but I am not prepared to pay for 30% of the profits of the banks, especially as it is "Money for Nothing". I am not originally from the UK and was shocked beyond believe when I came across this practise, I could not believe that a UK goverment can allows this. Practises like this belongs to 3rd world (or even 6th, 7th world) countries and the banks should be ashamed beyond believe for this practise. It is Sick!!!!!!!!!!

2October 2010 EOS Solutions UK Plc 2 Birchwood Office Park Fearnwood WA2 0XS Dear Sir/Madam Re:− Account/Reference Number You have contacted me regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself. I would point out that I have no knowledge of any such debt being owed to EOS Solutions UK Plc., unless you can provide evidence as to my liability towards you for the debt in question, please ensure the matter is handed back to Paypal Private Ltd. As you seem intent on asking for payment for this unenforceable account, I will reiterate that you will of course be aware I have absolutely no intention of paying money to you, or anyone else who can not prove they own the alleged debt, or indeed that I owe it. I am familiar with the Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidance which states that it is unfair to send demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question. I would also point out that the OFT say under the Guidance that it is unfair to pursue third parties for payment when they are not liable. In not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt you are using deceptive and unfair methods. Furthermore ignoring or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment amounts to physical/psychological harassment. I would ask that no further contact be made concerning the above account as well as the ceasing of generically produced correspondence unless you can provide evidence as to my liability towards you for the debt in question. I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed. Otherwise I will have no option but to make a complaint to the trading standards department and consider informing the OFT of your actions. TAKE URGENT NOTE: I DO NOT WISH TO RECEIVE OR ENTER INTO CORRESPONDENCE WITH YOU OR ANY REPRESENTATIVE OF YOUR ORGANISATION, OR INDEED ANY AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVE EMPLOYED BY ANY ORGANISATION THAT YOU AND Paypal Private LtdISSUE/D INSTRUCTIONS TO. There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.) THEREFORE TAKE NOTE THAT I REVOKE LICENSE UNDER COMMON LAW FOR YOU, OR YOUR REPRESENTATIVES TO VISIT ME AT MY PROPERTY AND IF YOU DO SO, THEN YOU WILL BE LIABLE FOR DAMAGES FOR A TORT OF TRESSPASS AND ACTION WILL BE TAKEN, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, POLICE ATTENDANCE I trust this outlines my position clearly and you may consider this to be my final response. Yours Sincerely, I also always enjoying posting this series of letters: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=20140&d=1279699306

When Paypal clamped their Deep Freeze on my accounts with no reason beside to fund their cash flow, I decided they and their cronies, eBay can take a hike. They passed some accounts to iQor but I soon learn it is actually iGnore, They disappeared quitely and a few months later some EOS Solution tried to raise their silly head. I send them the "Prove Letter" and they could not run away quickly enough. Quit since. You can safely ignore these idiots, their is absolute nothing they can do, if you still feel you want to deal with the original eBay account, then deal directly with them. Me personally developed such a low opinion of eBay and Paypal that I wouldn't, but that's me!

I recently send a letter to HSBC to refund the theft charges by using the template letter from MSE: I am writing to request that you repay all the charges in relation to direct debits, unauthorised overdrafts and standing orders that have been applied to this account of which the majority were levied post -July 2007. By issuing me with these charges I feel that you have broken the FSA’s regulatory principle to ‘pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly’. I am also claiming a refund of the fees for the following reasons: The charges are unfair under section 140A(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and contrary to the requirement of good faith, having caused a significant imbalance in our relationship and a detriment to myself, and under regulation 5(1) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, in the following respects: The charges were excessive and punitive in comparison with the costs to the bank caused by my conduct which triggered the charges. The charges were set by reference to the overall cost to the bank of providing current accounts to all of its customers which held such an account, rather than merely to the cost of my conduct thereby effectively requiring me to subsidise the provision of current accounts by the bank to other customers. In the premises the bank did not deal fairly as between myself and its other customers. The existence and quantum of the charges were inadequately and/or insufficiently explained and/or drawn to my attention either; when my account was first opened; when I gave an instruction which would result in the levying of a charge; or otherwise before any particular charge was applied. The circumstances and manner in which the charges were levied created potential for the application of multiple charges and the levying of charges to give rise to the application of further charges. The complexity of the charges and/or the circumstances in which they were levied. The nature of the charges and/or the circumstances of their application were such as to cause me inherent difficulties in predicting the incidence and amount of such charges in advance. The absence of any effective competition between providers of current accounts which restricted my ability to chose a current account operated on terms which did not provide for charges such as (and/or equivalent to) those levied by your bank. The charges were excessive in comparison with the level of borrowing which triggered the levying of the said charges. In particular, and without prejudice, the burden of proof for the above rests onHSBC to prove that the circumstances of our relationship are fair (pursuant to section 140B(9) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974), so unless you can provide evidence to the contrary I expect a refund of the full amount requested by return. It took them only a single day to come up with the response, letting me to believe it is a "Ready Made" counter argument against the new arguments that is evolving. It could be of interest to many and also could be the arguments many of the banks will be using.

any suggestions?

Had a loan with these jokers called Wonga. When on a DMP they refused to deal with my appointed representatives. They didn't send a DN but did registered a default on my credit file. I made a SAR earlier which they completely ignored, I have to decide whether to report it to the ICO or to take them to court. Now I received a letter from slime balls calling themselves Roxburge Debt Collectors, what is the best way to deal with these clowns? Send them a "Prove It" letter or a CCA request? The amount sky rocketed from just over £200 a year ago to close to £1000, who'd love to see how they defend that in court!

I do think you have a very strong case but you will have to play it right. I did send this to admin and asked them to provide some expert input, hopefully they will come back soon with some more advice.

You can still make payments arrangements even when a creditor has issued court proceedings and I can't see no reason why a third party (like Payplan) won't be able to do that, they are certainly doing that even after you received a CCJ, here is an extract from their web site: "Can I enter into a DMP if I already have a CCJ? CCJs don't prevent you entering into a DMP; Payplan will help you make the payments to creditors who have issued you with a CCJ. You will be required to provide details of your CCJ during your financial assessment. CCJ payments will be given priority when Payplan distribute your payments monthly." I would strongly suggest you give them a call. It certainly would be a big relief if they handle these 2 companies!

I received a letter today stating that the case has been discontinued. Therefore I wait for official confirmation from the Court. I made an earlier application for a strike out, which was rejected. Can I make any "Waste Cost" claims against Carter, including the £40 for the strike out application?

Do you have any statements with a £20 penalty charge on? This will prove that didn't supply the correct documents because their contract they have send say £12 but their theft charges was £20 back then.

I used the one in post #76, I do not know whether a template letter exists. It is probable a good way, it can be done by leaving out the 2nd paragraph about the DN but the letter must go as quick as possible to minimise the arrears amount? Here is the letter again (DN paragraph removed): [Your Address] [Their Address] [Date] Dear Sir/Madam Re:− Account/Reference Number xxxxxxx ***Unlawful Rescission*** I refer to your Default Notice dated xxxxxxx, received by me on xxxxxx and your subsequent letter terminating the agreement by demanding the balance in full, dated xxxxx, received xxxxxxxxxx, in which you confirm that you had in fact terminated the above agreement by demanding the balance in full. I accept your unlawful rescission of the agreement and I note that you are now entitled to claim those arrears genuinely due at the time of the termination (not including any unlawful charges ) and I would be obliged if you would advise me of the exact amount of those arrears, against which will be a claim for unlawful rescission. Yours faithfully, majimix I assume they demanded the full amount?

Yes, it is actually only addressed to Welcome but it is good that Salens see it as well. Pre-action protocol states that they (Salems) have to investigate all queries, so if they try to get nasty and ignored it, it would not be helpful for them if they were aware of it and proceeded when they knew about any issues. A SAR is always relevant IMHO, you do not know what will turn up that can be useful later! I did sent a SAR to HSBC and it contained nice info about emails when I made the PPI claim, when they responded and refused payment, they made statements which were incorrect, according to the emails!

HP uses schedule 3 and I do not see Total Amount Payable. This agreement is a Fix-Sum agreement according to the nature of the agreement description, therefore it should have it as it use schedule 1. That's the way I have it.

According to: Consumer Credit - (Agreements) Regulations 1983 4) Subject to paragraphs (5) and (9) below, the information, statements of the protection and remedies, signature and separate boxes which this regulation requires documents embodying regulated consumer credit agreements to contain, shall be set out in the order given by paragraphs (a) to (f) below under, where applicable, the headings specified below-- © under the heading "Key Financial Information", the financial and related particulars set out in paragraphs 6 to 8B, 11 to 14 and 15 to 17 of Schedule 1 to these Regulations; Schedule 1 Total charge for credit, rate of interest, etc. 9. Agreements for fixed-sum credit except agreements-- (1) The total charge for credit, with a list of its constituent parts. Total amount payable 11. Agreements falling within paragraph 9. The total amount payable, being the total and 9 above.

Then you have to send them the Unlawful Rescission Letter, I would suggest a copy to the solicitors as well. What that mean in law is that you only have to pay the arrears at of now (when you send the termination letter) and you can also claim damages against them for the unlawful termination because they have terminated the agreement without a valid Default Notice (equal to no DN). Just to check, what is the amount they ask now, is it the full amount or only the arrears? If only the arrears than they have not necessary terminated the agreement. Well, they can get away with that regarding the CCA section 77 request with an agreement without a signature but they will have to cough it up if they try the court. Do you ticked the 2 insurance boxes on the one you received from them?

A mastercard is a different story. Won't Payplan not dela with HSBC and MBNA as well, even now? If you want to get the maximum amount back then you will need your statements.

What you really need is all your statements from the start of the account. You can get from HSBC by either phoning HSBC themselves or going into a branch and ask for them to be send to you. They will charge £10 (this is the max allowed fee!) but it is worth that many times over!! They will send them to you within 7 days and you will be able to work out what you can claim back. The beauty of the PPI is the fact that it can make claiming back charges much easier. If you making a SAR you will not be getting the statements (it is not personal data!), the data is hidden in trillion computer pages. You WILL HAVE to do it, do not hope for these problems to go away, they will only get smaller if you act! If you get these statements, I will be able to help you with the calculations and the claim but you have to get them! Just to give you an idea: My AQUA card balance was app. £1400 with PPI that I didn't applied for. If I get back what I have calculated then the balance will be app £450. My Barclaycard balace was £570, getting the amount claimed back, it will be £60, I am also claiming back mis-sold ID Theft Protection, then the balance will be in credit by app £180. My CrapOne Card is about £191, they will have to pay ME now app £350. I will keep going at them seeing that I used what the FOS recommended and if they fail, then it is off to the FOS, with an additional £200-300 for me! Furthermore, it is making the amount on the DN inaccurate, one more point to get it removed. Do you owe Paypal money? If I were you, I simply would not pay them, they are utter FILTH! But it is up to you.

To summarise: The agreement is unenforceable but not necessary irredeemably unenforceable. Did you receive a Default Notice? This would probably be invalid. Did you receive the correct documents as a result of your CCA request? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The agreement is unenforceable for the following reasons: Amount of Credit Wrong Total Cash Price Wrong APR Wrong Total charges/Fee Missing Total charge for Credit Wrong Monthly Payment Amount Wrong Total amount payable Missing (This fact, combined with the incorrect put you at a severe disadvantage because you did not know what you were buying!) Have to answer this regarding the Insurances, BOTH Lifecare and Homecare boxes MUST be ticked: Tick box ticked?:Is there a declaration signed by the debtor, with a tick box ticked opposite the insurance he has chosen that confirms that the debtor has opted into taking the insurance's shown in the summary above? BUT: "Section 127(3) of the Act has been repealed by the Consumer Credit Act 2006, therefore agreements entered into on or after 6 April 2007 cannot be held to be 'irredeemably unenforceable'." It can be made enforceable by a Judge unless you can argue that these breaches put you at a serious disadvantage (Point 7 is IMHO such a point). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I see receive a reply to your CCA request? Does it contain a statement of account, showing all payments going in and out of the account over its lifetime? If not, then you will also have to put the account in “Dispute”. You will need to get hold of their response for this. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Did you receive a Default Notice and does it state that: “To remedy the breach you must pay to us the total arrears of £xxx.xx within fourteen (14) days.”? If so, then the DN is invalid and they unlawfully terminated the agreement and you can claim “Unlawful Rescission” of contract. You will have to send this letter (and Salems): [Your Address] [Their Address] [Date] Dear Sir/Madam Re:− Account/Reference Number xxxxxxx ***Unlawful Rescission*** I refer to your Default Notice dated xxxxxxx, received by me on xxxxxx and your subsequent letter terminating the agreement by demanding the balance in full, dated xxxxx, received xxxxxxxxxx, in which you confirm that you had in fact terminated the above agreement by demanding the balance in full. The default notice failed to give me the required statutory time in which to seek legal advice and/or remedy any alleged defect. Your actions resulted in insufficient time for me to even obtain an appointment with a solicitor let alone remedy the alleged default. These actions by you, have resulted in you unlawfully rescinding the alleged agreement. I accept your unlawful rescission of the agreement and I note that you are now entitled to claim those arrears genuinely due at the time of the termination (not including any unlawful charges ) and I would be obliged if you would advise me of the exact amount of those arrears, against which will be a claim for unlawful rescission. Yours faithfully,

Before it really becomes serious you will get letters for Carter, there are a few letters, taking time, so nothing is going to happen soon anyway. You could sit and wait to see what they do.

The APR are used to compare products and seeing that Welcome made theirs looks better than what it really is, place you at a disadvantage because the product "is not as good" as on the advertisement!

We can help you putting together an argument. Also, you can claim back interest as well as interest over charged. It adds up to a significant amount. You can also claim the 8% statutory interest if this ends up in court but I believe you cannot counterclaim the PPI now? Someone has some thoughts on it? It gets better!! If you can show that the theft charges is a direct result of the PPI, then they have to refund it, with interest and again, interest over charged. The PPI, interest and charges are all on the FOS website, the moment they agree that it was mis-sold they will have to refund these. If they refused to refund and the FOS find in your favour, the FOS will tell them to pay you a few hundred quid for your effort!! Claiming back PPI is worthwhile!!

It means a court can make it enforceable. You will have to argue that it seriously disadvantaged you. I am still perplexed by the interest amount, probably the interest percentage is wrong but if the number of repayments are wrong, IMOH that is a very serious disadvantage. There is also some minor layout mistakes and knowing Welcome, they do not send out valid DN's. It all add up!!

They certainly got it wrong with the total cash price. This will make the APR inaccurate on its own. Unless I miss something completely, how on earth is 16.77% of £10495 over 85 months = £7061.35? It should have "Total amount payable". Have a look at this assessment: http://s928.photobucket.com/albums/ad125/lord_tiger_putin/?action=view&current=Welcome.png This looks unenforceable but remember: "Section 127(3) of the Act has been repealed by the Consumer Credit Act 2006, therefore agreements entered into on or after 6 April 2007 cannot be held to be 'irredeemably unenforceable'."

The scan is their copy. They probably signed the original but did they ticked the boxes for the insurance, that is very important. The figures do not add up as you said. That has serious repercussions, making the APR incorrect, amongst others, have a look at this assessment of the agreement: http://s928.photobucket.com/albums/ad125/lord_tiger_putin/?action=view&current=Welcome.png