With the case**

Michelle you can make a comment if you wish to you might be familiar witness case??

Which was provided***** number 2 above

What a SHAMBOLIC case!!!!! Unbelievable.... Today we have been to the court, bearing in mind we have not received the defendants WS so far, apart from their request for time extension on 17th July.... 1- DJ accepted the defendants WS, based on "the case being in small claims tracking" (woooooww no valid reason was provided by the defendant why they would like to request this extension) 2- all 3 witness statements for 3 cases which were sent on 10th, 11th and 12th July separately (by special delivery) SOMEHOW(?) have been taken out of the file and the DJ was given an empty file and he asked where was our WS? (However hsbc's statements which we provided according to them on 21st July- 10 days after ours were in front of the DJ) -!!!!!!! Magic.... Sometimes we must believe in the Gods magical power, nothing is impossible !!!!!!! 3- we have just managed to adjourn the case...... However barrister who was sent by our big HSBC (sorry HSBC the GREAT) was not happy and asked the judge "if we can finalise these 3 cases today if we provide a copy of the WS to the claimant and the claimant can have a 15mins break" wooooooooowww wooowwww wooooowww again..... What a lot of b....cks he was talking... only 1 word that I can use.... UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!!! As being the financial analyst here is the probability of all 3 above being "coincidence " According to the royal mails statistics the rate of success in delivering special deliveries is 99% So 1% chance of the claimants WS failure of delivery to the court and they are all sent separately and none of them was in front of the judge So 1% x 1% x1% = 0.0001% chance of not being delivered(knowing that they are all delivered as the tracking number shows) Human error: 50-50 chance they were put into the file or not put into the file 50% x 0.0001% = 0.0000005 chance of these whole scenario happening Like I said nothing is impossible in this world, I hope no one gets me wrong, I am not speculating or creating conspiracy theories.... This is how it is calculated mathematically.... What do you think Andy shall I have a lottery ticket today? I have similar chance to win with above? Regards

That is correct so in any way the consumer loses so is it fair?

Thanks Andy you are great, I will definitely update you guys after Thursday Can I also please invite you to my other thread called "A classic admiral ploy" Regards

I can work out to quantify how much loss (average) will I make in the next 3 years as a financial analyst who is specialised in risk management and derivatives this would not take too much of my time My question is if I were to prove the judge my potential loss, in what basis can I pursue to reclaim this loss? It seems to me there is a big similarity between 2 scenarios of if you credit rating is ruined by a firms fault , (wrong handling) and your insurance premium is raised by non fault accident Can anyone please show me a case study in the past which I can look up and what part of the consumer law may restrict this unfair treatment I know they are regulated by FCA but need the specific part

I think this is wrong, Either way the consumer loses If I dealt with as a claim damage basis, I would have lost my no claims bonus If I dealt with as an accident with the third party i am involved in an accident Either way I lose, so is this correct? I know what you are saying but remember the law in the uk is common which means interpretation of the previous cases So has anyone dealt with any insurance company in a similar situation? Thanks

Ok Bulgaria I think you are missing the point Under no circumstances whatever their T&Cs stating; in the uk it can not be against the public interest So far it is contradicting each other no claims bonus and then accident. Secondly it is a ploy to increase the next premium So otherwise why these questionnaire is made for? To assess the risk if there has been no risk to my insurer in the past why would it affect my future insurance policies? What will happen if I take a court action to correct this mistake? Under what part of the law can I pursue? Regards

***admitted

I though exactly the same The 3rd party already admired their fault and paid everything, accident exchange some reason they informed my insurer as they were scared that in case the 3rd party does not pay they can claim it from my insurer, So it states I the notes on admiral system that 0 claims but involved in an accident which I believe it is wrong Basically they are giving an incentive of no claims bonus but on the other hand they are taking it back more saying that I WaS involved in an accident How is this possible? Is it legal?

Yes guys I can understand however 1- why do I have to answer yes to the question have I been involved in any accident in my future premium, it is true that I have not been, the car was in parking position empty 2- what is the meaning of no claims bonus and involving in an accident? No claims bonus is to award the drivers with in their next premium? 3- surely if their T&Cs is against the public interest it is void document I law is it not? Thanks

Hi Andy any chance to have a look at the case Regards

Dear all My car was involved in an accident whilst in parking position in a car park, a delivery lorry took the front bumper of my car. Bless him the lorry driver left me a message on the front window apologising and he already opened a case through his company, I spoke to the third parties insurer and I called the audi garage where I bought the car from They wee quite helpful and they involved accident exchange. Immediately I received a phone call and we arranged the car to be taken to the garage and I was given a courtesy car. They have done everything perfectly and I was quite happy. I was informed that is will not affect my insurance as the other party and the 3rd party insurer accepted the full responsibility I received a letter from admiral yesterday stating that they have been informed by accident exchange and this is recorded in my file on their system and I asked them what does it mean? They said it will not affect your no claims bonus however it will affect your next 3 years insurance premium, I always pay the premiums up front So basically the claim is 0 but I have to answer yes to the question Have you been involved in any accident I believe this is unfair, admiral said it is in T&CS that they have to be informed As far as I am aware these guys own some other companies therefore they will be sharing information with other insurers, I asked them to remove this note in the account otherwise I will peruse through court action Their response was feel free to take the action I need an urgent advise from you guys whether they are allowed to do? Kind regards

Thanks Andy I PMed you with the details but what would you recommend Shall I provide the latest correspondence between us and HSBC to the court with a covering letter as an update or wait for HSBC to do? So far no documents showing the application to the court given to me by the defendant? Do you think they will try their luck with ignoring or am I not supposed to be given a copy if they applied for an extension? I am a bit worried about the court may not be able to see? Regards

Thanks Andy I will, if the DJ accepts their WS, can I request the case to be adjourned with the defendant covering the daily cost of us being off from work? Also these cases are so vital and in the event of us winning, it will open the doors to so many consumers Would you be interested in the details of the case? Kind regards

To be honest Citizen I have the same interpretation of this particular part of CPR 3.8 There is a case referenced below MA A Lloyd & Sons Ltd v PPC International Ltd [2014] EWHC 41 (QB) Had a similar problem and even though parties agreed to extend the time the court overruled and even the DJ's words were: The Judge in Lloyd said that one possible interpretation of CPR r.32.10 is that the party in default is not permitted to call the intended witness to give oral evidence on any matter unless the court gives permission – even if the witness statement not served in time only relates to a distinct part of the evidence relied upon. The Judge left the point open for a future decision (para 17). So what is next? Can I request the councillor (their barrister) to be asked to leave the court room on the day? Regards

Dear all I took 3 court actions against hsbc based on BCOBS unfair treatment and breach of data protection act as well as breach of contract The deadline of the witness statements was on 17th July which I (claimant) provided them within the deadline I received a letter on 19th July dated on 17th asking me by CPR 3.8 extension of this deadline I gathered some information on the internet and this website and responded to them the following (as I did not want to be seen who is not co-operating but at the same time I don't want to allow them to get away with their mistake as thee is no valid reason given) "The claimant may wish to not oppose your request of extension however at the time that claimant received your request (19th July) the deadline had already expired. According to the claimant's interpretation of CPR; 3.8 (as you mentioned in your letter) might have not been effective in our current position unless the court were persuaded therefore any extension is a matter for the court at this stage" So they ignored this part of the letter and they provided their statements and last one I received yesterday, the court is on 31st July So far they have not filed any application to the court What do you recommend? Shall I provide these correspondence to the court? Regards

Hi Citizen You are right, the funny thing is same company HSBC in 2 different format; Same year and the same person HSBC is allowing my gf to go overdrawn £400 which she never agreed an overdraft facility at all no signature etc... Because they can see her regular income so the only way to make money was allowing her to go overdrawn, my frustration is all the transactions are pos(point of sale) which is debit card transaction so they could have easily stopped the transaction so she would have known that she does not have money... On the other hand FD which is using HSBC risk system; has stopped my GF Credit Card as a responsible lender even though she was paying her card regularly even though she has still available limit with no further notice etc... So it is the same person, it is in the same year and it is the same bank and the system; so how can one department allows her to use more funds and the other department saying nooo we are a responsible lender and she is a high risk and we are stopping her credit card facilities... Is this legal... I have another question for you if you dont mind... Can a bank stop reduce your limit without giving any further notice? even though you have never failed to pay and you regularly pay every month the full amount?? They cut down from £2,250 to £950? are they allowed to do a credit check in your name without your consent? Regards

Thanks Citizen You are great once again you are here to help me ) Great news.. Do you think that she has been treated unfairly?? can a bank lose the track of an account and chase you for the debt and discreetly close it?? And informal overdraft limit? does it work with the "fair fees policy"?? £400 is a bigger amount than HSBC min authorised overdraft limit of £250?? Last question is the hearing fee? £325 does it sound right for a small claims tracking? or is it going towards fast track?? Regards

Dear All I would like to ask your help please as I believe that my gf is in a bit difficult situation My GF opened a First Direct Accounts in 1998 one of which is a kind of saving account at the time and the other one is a current account... Both accounts have £250 authorised overdraft limit. She had a monthly SO from the current account to the savings.. . her accounts are up and down normally up until she sold her business in 2004 and there was a big lump sum money credited in her account 2005, eventually setting up her new business etc her finance became average again but all of as sudden First direct started to chase her in 2012 and 2013 for the saving account as somehow it became negative £246... It has been a nightmare, calls on top of calls messages left in her answer phone and letters etc... Finally I had to take over the case and asked them where did this negative balance come from?? They could not chase it back and they "discreetly" closed the account and "GOODWILL GESTURE" they credited her account. Having a great relationship with HSBC personally (taking them to the court twice and winning them) I asked her to put an SAR in may 2013 and SAR came back with... "All the documents are enclosed however I am sorry to let you know that I was unable to find the records of your saving account for the date between 2004 and 2005 as well as some of your credit card statements" My GF is immaculate with her paperwork and checked whole her paperwork as well as what FD sent... They have never sent her the paperwork for that account and she had appx £400-£500 in her account at the time with the SO from her current account and somehow in few months time account became -£246 and in the transcript of the account its states dormant account last transaction from 2002 We spoke to FD and no satisfactory response came.. recorded the calls etc.. In the meanwhile she has had an HSBC account which was opened in 2011 and she was using that account for personal expenditures like petrol pocket money etc. - Basic account with no agreed overdraft limit and NO DD or SO attached to the account. Due to her sons illness she did not look after her account and she went overdrawn in few occasions again in 2013, but they are not £10-£20 overdraft they are £300 - £400 overdrawn and the transactions are not single transactions they are set of 5-6 transactions of POS transactions (point of sale) which is a debit card transactions? We wrote HSBC that my GF has not agreed overdraft limit and none of the transactions are DD nor SO how come HSBC allowed her to go overdrawn their standard letter came with "as a responsible lender from time to time we allow our customers informal overdraft facility" When I asked them what is the informal overdraft limit? it is not £10,£20 £50 we are talking about £400?? which makes a normal overdraft? and they charged every month £150 "fair fees policy" thank you very much... So based on unfair treatment I took HSBC to the court with 2 separate action.. 1- HSBC for her HSBC bank account of xxxxx 2- HSBC (trading as First Direct) - exactly like that - for her First Direct Account of yyyyy so the fees have been paid separately and questionnaires have been submitted separately... Now my question is we received a letter from the DJ stating that all the cases of A1X.... and A1Y... are suitable for SCT and have been given ONE hearing of 90mins in July 2014 and very kindly can you please pay single fee of £325?? 1- why are the cases all combined in 1 hearing? 2- Are they joking for £325 charge which she already paid £210 and £100 while submitting the case?? Can anyone please recommend me what to do? I am worried if it goes to the court together because of the limit it may turn to Fast Track?? I look forward to your advise Regards

OK I see what you are saying... So what is the advise?? 1- we are suing the bailiff because we are overcharged and we also would like to get a claim for the bailiff not following the bailiff regulations and acting inappropriately in front of the public and this causing damage on name and reputation 2- the landlord issue... who should I sue? the dormant company? if i start a case they will request to be strike out by CPR 3.6 or something like that as the company does not trade? 3- the link that you sent me is not stating anything about the question i asked for? I can not issue a VAT invoice on behalf of a completely different company using their VAT registration number on my company headed paper.. Remember the agent is not a part of the group, the agent gives the groups VAT number on their company headed paper. it is fraud.. why dont you accept it. I have few other businesses and never experienced thing like this. So does it mean that because I go to tesco i am going to invoice my customers with tescos vat registration number?? it is also relevant for the prospectus of cash flow. we did not have to pay extra 20% of the £8000 at the time. we can not reclaim that VAT invoice because it does not meet the HMRC criteria please check the link http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/vat/managing/charging/vat-invoices.htm The warrant I referred is distress rule 1888 the management agent issued a warrant for the bailiff to come to our premise. The management agent is not authorised by the landlord in the first place. we have got no relationship with the management agent we have got only contractual relationship with the landlord. No matter who manages the property the warrant (for the bailiff) was issued by an unauthorised person Regards

By the way the property was sold immediately after we took a legal action, does this mean anything to you?

Thanks Steam Can I please remind you the HMRCs guidelines of invoicing and VAT. The invoice that we received from a 3rd party management agent and they use the lanndlords parent companys VAT registeration number in their invoice which is NOT common like you stated. For example if I invoice you on behalf of my friend and using his registration (VAT) number but using my company name it would be FRAUD. For something a fraudulent activity if I force you to pay and send you a bailiff then the bailiff company is going to be involved with this fraud as well, I am quite sure that they do not pay VAT as i have insiders in HMRC as I stated in my thread above Companies house records as well as HMRC!! Secondly Also, damages in replevin are not limited to the immediate pecuniary losses occasioned by the distress but extend to damages for annoyance and injury to credit and reputation in trade As do monetary claims. Our case is monetary claim and we even were charged more than the paperwork states, why do you ignore that part?? so shall I leave it and say: ooo well we paid it is gone and dont worry about the excess charge, we requested the charges to be refunded and they never did!!! Finally the warrant was issued by the management agent who was not even authorised by the landlord... very strange is it not??? the management agent was authorised by another company within the group but has got no direct relationship with the landlord. It is not even the landlords parent company. For example: I have 3 companies; A B C A owns another company called E, E has got rental income and charges VAT using my VAT registration number and using an agent company called X. A and E are both dormant no trading B owns a company called D and they are both active companies D signs an agreement for the properties that E owns with X so X decided to issue a warrant on behalf of E is it legal now? it is a void document!!! It does not exist. I am not on about we are behind or not but they have not followed the procedure correctly I am suing them for 1- excessive charge 2- the warrant which was issued is illegal I hope this helps you to see Regards

In response to steam Replevin is a legal process where you ask a court to return goods (or a vehicle) that has been seized because the debt is not legal or enforcement action does not comply with regulations. In our case we preferred to pay (funds) rather than going to the stage of our goods to be seized, therefore our replevin action is based on getting the funds back! Regardless it is disputed or not disputed, the warrant was issued under the distress rules 1888 and there was no court order or any other authorities permission taken as this is a commercial law. Therefore the responsibility was shared by the bailiff company and the company who issued the warrant. So if I issue a warrant for you (I dont even know you) and if i send you a bailiff does it make it right or legally do you have to pay me? We do not pay rent directly to the landlord we were asked to pay the rent to a 4th party(not a second or 3rd party) so can you actually see where the unlawful activity starts from? The landlord does not pay VAT according to the governments records HMRC and Companies house. It does not even declare any rental income as they are Dormant,so the warrant which empowered the bailiff company is a VOID document, it did not have any legal personality in the first place. Also, damages in replevin are not limited to the immediate pecuniary losses occasioned by the distress but extend to damages for annoyance and injury to credit and reputation in trade, I am sure if you are a legal person you must also have heard Smith v Enright [1894] 69 LT 724 Regards