HUMBLEMAN vs HFC-WEIGHTMANS COURT ACTION

[volvodriver]

If you use OpenOffice, which is free you can save out to PDF directly

[humbleman]

Right

 

got a copy of their AQ and a reply to my Defence, together with the statements for 2006/7 only even though the account started in 1998.

 

I will need to scan and will post later put the gist of the reply is that they do not have the original since it would have lots of agreement to store and they therefore use computer based archive system-microfiche.

 

It also refers to exhibit marked A in the defence which is supposed to be a copy of the agreement and terms and conditions but as expected there is no attachment.

[geoffmr1]

Hi Humbleman,

 

Sounds like exactly the same reply I got. They only sent me an Application form but have admitted they don't have the 2nd page which apparently had the T&C's on it. They sent me their current T&C's which are irrelevant.

 

How much did they estimate their costs will be overall??

 

They said £4500 in the copy AQ they sent me but £3500 in the copy AQ they sent Hopeful1.

[humbleman]

How much did they estimate their costs will be overall??

 

They said £4500 in the copy AQ they sent me but £3500 in the copy AQ they sent Hopeful1.

 

estimate to date is £1000+vat

overall is £5000+vat

 

In my case they said that although they didn't send me the 2nd page of the agreement last year (which contained all the prescribed terms) it was due to an error but they have attached to the reply, which is not correct since there are no exhibits

[geoffmr1]

So they have sent them direct to the court & only sent you a copy of the actual AQ itself. They done the same thing to me, they didn't provide me with copies of any exhibits they intend to rely on.

 

They have actually stated in their reply to my defence that they don't have the 2nd page of the supposed agreement because its on microfiche & its not feasible to keep everything. That being the case how is it they kept yours??

 

I bet they have sent their up to date T&C's to the court.

 

They really are getting their costs from thin air. Their costs so far in my case are estimated to be £1200 & £4500 overall.

[car2403]

Ring the Court to ask if they've seen the attachments - if they have, ask them if they can fax you a copy, as you haven't been served with them.

 

If pages of the agreement are missing, you'll have a complete defence and this will be open/closed in no time.

[humbleman]

will scan and post later

[trevor33]

Subscibing....go get em Humbleman

[humbleman]

Subscibing....go get em Humbleman

 

In my case I just don't know how they can succeed.

[trevor33]

In my case humbleman, they came up with agreement many MONTHS after CCA but with excellent help from Cagers, I am vigorously defending.

Best regards Trevor33.

[humbleman]

In my case humbleman, they came up with agreement many MONTHS after CCA but with excellent help from Cagers, I am vigorously defending.

Best regards Trevor33.

In instances where they come up with an agreement different to the one they have previously provided when you first CCA'd them, then the arguement would be that they had not fulfilled their obligations and whilst in default they should not have pursued the debt;

 

Para 123; Failure of a Default or Termination Notice to be accurate not only invalidates the Default or Termination Notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co - [1998] All ER (D) 339) but is an unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the Court enforcing any alleged debt, but give the Claimant a claim for damages. (Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119)

[car2403]

In instances where they come up with an agreement different to the one they have previously provided when you first CCA'd them, then the arguement would be that they had not fulfilled their obligations and whilst in default they should not have pursued the debt;

 

Para 123; Failure of a Default or Termination Notice to be accurate not only invalidates the Default or Termination Notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co - [1998] All ER (D) 339) but is an unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the Court enforcing any alleged debt, but give the Claimant a claim for damages. (Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119)

 

Agreed, but sadly this doesn't happen in practice, as most Judges would want to deal with the substantial issues on the table at any hearing - frankly, they won't give a damn about any default of a CCA request if the default was subsequently remedied prior to the hearing. (Even if that was a few days beforehand!)

 

However, in trevors case, they only came up with the agreement after the claim was issued against him - originally, as a reply to a CCA request, no agreement was forthcoming.

[trevor33]

Just looking through the papers I have and come across the T&C's, anyone know when 'Beneficial Finance' came on to the scene. I have a feeling that my T&C's are not the ones for the agreement (later version).

The alleged agreement is from HFC but T&C at bottom are from Beni Finance.

[humbleman]

I think 1998 they merged and called HFC

[trevor33]

I think you may be confusing BENEFICIAL BANK with BENEFICIAL FINANCE. With my first dealings with this mob, it was called Beneficial Bank (about 1998) and then later HFC Bank. Still I may be wrong. Needs someone with a bit more knowledge to confirm.

[PriorityOne]

HFC were around in their own right in the early 1990s, as they had a huge branch in the Holborn area (London) around then. They also had a smaller branch in one of the coastal towns near where I was at the time.

 

Not sure if that helps or not...

[trevor33]

Thanks P1. It's Beneficial Finance i'm interested in. Want to know when they came on the scene.

Query....why does a smiley appear instead of a N0 eight, anyone know?

[humbleman]

Their reply to my defence

 

http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg10/123GGGG_2008/Picture.jpg

 

http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg10/123GGGG_2008/2.jpg

 

http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg10/123GGGG_2008/3.jpg

 

http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg10/123GGGG_2008/4.jpg

 

http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg10/123GGGG_2008/5.jpg

 

http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg10/123GGGG_2008/6.jpg

 

http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg10/123GGGG_2008/7.jpg

 

Would appreciate comments

[pt2537]

right, now ive picked myself up after laughing my backside off..........

 

well, what a load of bollox, they are obviously hoping that the judge will be a complete cuckoo and not understand the CCA 1974

 

i will need to have a good read over this reply to take all the point in but they are clutching at straws i feel here

[humbleman]

Hi Paul

Thanks for taking the time to read the usual.

 

I just can't imagine a firm of solicitors colluding with clients who clearly are in the wrong. They must have dealt with so many cases where their clients have had to withdraw or back off in similar circumstances.

[cashins]

Beneficial Bank, Finance, were operating in loans & High St (point of sale) finance at least as far back as the 80's. Top of their agreement said Benificial Finance, small print said Beneficial Bank. They were a Yankee outfit.

 

HFC (Household Finance Corporation, again Yankee), took over Bene as stated and I think Beneficial died out as an independant organisation at that point.

 

HFC is now owned by HSBC.

 

David

[robcag]

Thanks P1. It's Beneficial Finance i'm interested in. Want to know when they came on the scene.

Query....why does a smiley appear instead of a N0 eight, anyone know?

 

Hi Trevor

 

The smiley can be eliminated by putting a 'space' after the figure 8 [i.e. between the '8' and the ')'].

 

HTH

Rob

[trevor33]

Thanks cashins and robcag, will keep both in mind.

[humbleman]

Hi Paul

 

Don't know if I have to reply to their reply to my defence, and if so, is there a time limit.

 

Just to recap their reply was incomplete since they did not send me any exhibit referred to in it, when I spoke to the courts I was told that the files were with the judge so they are not sure if they have had the exhibits themselves.

[car2403]

There's no need to reply to a reply to your defence - that will come when witness statements or ordered later on.

 

You should write to them saying you haven't had the exhibits and ask them to serve them to you again.

Edited May 10, 2008 by car2403
Grammar!