Rascal v. Marbles (HFC)

[ims21]

Spreadsheet looks fine

 

Average APR in your case would be (16.9 + 14.9) /2

 

ims

[rascal]

ok thanks so 15.9. In terms of the amount on the N1 do I have to say how I arrived at this figure? I am also a little confused as to compounded interest on the spreadsheet. Is this different to the 8% interest that could be awarded by the Court or is this inclusive of? If the 8% interest is a different figure how do I arrive at this sum for the claim form? Do I have to provide the court with a list of my charges?

 

This is my draft POC - I have taken the majority of it from a previous user so apologies

 

 

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

 

 

1. The Claimant had a credit agreement, credit card number xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx ("the Agreement") with the Defendant which was opened on or around July 2003. I refer to the Limitation Act S32(1)© Kleinwort Benson -v-Lincoln City Council

 

2. At the time of opening the account the Claimant believes the Defendant misled the Claimant into procuring Payment Protection Insurance ("the Insurance") as part of the overall credit bargain.

 

3. The Claimant contends that:

a) The Insurance imposed upon the Claimant were neither defined nor explained, nor alternatives from other suppliers suggested.

b) The Claimant further contends that if the Insurance was applied correctly, that the Agreement was not executed in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974;

i) As the Insurance was in fact a charge for credit on the Conditional Sale Agreement, it could not also be part of the credit on the additional insurances agreement as under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit even where time is given for their payments

ii) If the Insurance was not a charge for credit in respect of the Conditional Sale Agreement, as it was compulsory, it was a charge for credit on the additional insurances and under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit

iii) For the reasons stated in either (i) or (ii) above, the agreement for additional insurances failed to state the correct amount of credit and did not comply with paragraph 2, schedule 6, which requires that regulated agreements contain as a prescribed term stating the correct amount of credit

iv) The agreement for additional insurances was therefore improperly executed under section 61 (1)(a) of the CCA.

 

 

4. Accordingly the Claimant asks:

 

a) The Court finds that the Defendant acted in a way grossly contravening ordinary principles of fair dealing and reopens the credit bargain to perform restitution to rectify the unjust enrichment performed, to the detriment of the Claimant by the sum of [charges plus compound interest] by conferring a benefit under an ineffective transaction.

 

b) If the Court is unable to perform restitution, then the Claimant seeks damages of £[charges plus compound interest] by virtue of the Defendants’ actions, be they fraudulently or mistakenly, in obtaining the Insurances.

 

c) Alternatively, the Claimant seeks damages of £[charges plus compound interest] in regards to the Defendants clear breach of the Claimants human rights as prescribed by Article 1 of the first protocol of the Human Rights Act 1998 whereby the Defendants actions did cause the Claimant to suffer personal loss to the sum of £[charges plus compound interest]

 

d) Court costs;

 

e) The Claimant claims

 

i)Compound interest on the charges applied thereon to the Claimant’s account (“the principal claim”), at the annual average rate of

15.9 %. This is the rate applied by the Defendant to the Claimant’s unauthorised use or borrowing of the Defendant’s monies, as provided for in the contract. Please refer to Sempra Metals -v- Commissioners of Inland Revenue.

 

The Claimant’s case for claiming this rate is based in equity, and a legal requirement for fairness and balance.

 

The Claimant deems the Defendant’s principal indebtedness to the claimant to be unauthorised, since it is comprised of insurance charges that were imposed upon the Claimant, they were not explained and were in fact mis-sold, not advising the Claimant that alternative products were available elsewhere.

 

ii) In the alternative to e i), if the Court is unable to agree that the claimant is entitled to the contractual rates of interest, on the grounds stated, the Claimant avers that the defendant would be unjustly enriched if the Claimant’s entitlement was limited to the statutory rate of interest in that the defendant has had use of the sums and would have used these sums to re-lend at commercially compounded rates. On these grounds the Claimant seeks restitution of the compounded contractual interest at the defendant’s authorised borrowing rate of 15.9 % per annum.

 

iii) In the alternative to e i) and ii), if the Court finds that the Claimant is not entitled to contractual interest, the Claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984.

 

iv)Schedule showing interest calculated at the rate quoted at I is attached to these particulars of claim, as follows:

 

•Schedule A - Compound Contractual Interest calculated at 15.9%.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I also want to word how I already had insurance elsewhere in terms of critical illness and life cover via my employer and also various policies with MGM Assurance which included Lifestyle Protection in the event of redundancy etc.

Edited January 19, 2012 by rascal

[ims21]

ok thanks so 15.9. In terms of the amount on the N1 do I have to say how I arrived at this figure?

 

You fill in brief details of your claim on the N1 and refer to your PoC which should be attached to the N1. In your PoC you detail what you are claiming and the basis on which you are claiming. You also attach the spreadsheet to back up the figures. The PoC will also give details of any case law you are relying on.

 

I am also a little confused as to compounded interest on the spreadsheet. Is this different to the 8% interest that could be awarded by the Court or is this inclusive of?

 

The spreadsheet calculates pure compound interest. You would not get both compound and stat but you will ask for stat interest on the claim amount running from the date of judgement to the date of settlement. This is why it is worth looking at a higher nominal rate of interest in restitution.

 

If the 8% interest is a different figure how do I arrive at this sum for the claim form? Do I have to provide the court with a list of my charges?

 

Yes

 

You are going to have to do quite a bit of reading. Amongst other things you need to read up about...

 

> Interest in restitution (No.4 in my signature)

> Case law of Sempra Metals (Mentioned above)

> Limitations Act and Kleinwort Benson (Mentioned above)

> Form and content of PoC

> The process of issuing, dealing with a defence, allocation questionnaires, hearing etc.

 

Look in the ppi stickies as there is a thread there about a win in court, PoC for ppi and use the site search facility too.

 

This is not something you can do in five minutes....if you are going to appear on front of a judge you need to prepare.

 

ims

[rascal]

Thank you - it's really daunting I can see why a lot of people are put off at this stage or indeed turn to companies that claim they can do it for them. I've got 2 children under the age of 6 and another on the way so my mind is usually taken up with Balamory or Disney Junior than caselaw.... I've been out of the adult world for far too long.

[ims21]

Ah but claims companies don't do court....they are after the easy cases and the quick buck

 

ims

[rascal]

I received a letter from the Ombudsman this morning (23rd)

saying that my claim had gone to an adjudicator for final review

since my previous try with the Ombudsman had ruled that although Marbles "probably" acted unfairly

there was no need for compensation.

 

They have asked me to provide any extra information to them by 19th January which is obviously a few days ago.

 

The letter is dated 17th Jan but the frank mark on the envelope is 18th.

How was I supposed to send them further information by then?

Not that i have any.

Should I hold off filing my POC and N1 until I've received their final response they have said they endeavour to do it within 6 weeks.

[ims21]

Hi

 

It is up to you how you wish to proceed. You can either wait for fos or take matters into your own hands and start legal action.

 

ims

[rascal]

I guess waiting a few weeks to see what they say isn't going to make much difference other than more interest when I do eventually get my money back. In the mean time it gives me time to really brush up on the case law and do a kick ass POC.

[king123]

Hold on. You went bankrupt AFTER the PPI was missold? Then you're on a hiding to nothing. At best, any monies owed would be owed to the official receiver! Surely the bankruptcy settled all your affairs with HFC anyway? Or am I missing something?

[rascal]

I gave up on this claim back in 2012.

 

 

Why? - because the FOS adjudicator didn't agree with my claim

- I was then left with the small claims route.

 

 

Looking back my baby was only a month old and having 3 young kids under the age of 5 I literally just gave up with the claim.

 

 

Is this something that can be potentially relooked at?

 

 

Yes I know I've left it 5 years and I'm aware of the potential answer being no but was just curious as to thoughts?

 

 

I haven't kept any old spread sheets or anything so would literally have to start from scratch.

[dx100uk]

yes sar time start again

 

 

dx

[rascal]

Thank you I went on the MSE website yesterday and started a claim and today I received an email from someone at HSBC saying they were looking in to it. I never knew that HFC had sold everything on to HSBC. Will HSBC now have a record of the Ombudsman's decision with HFC? On reading through various forums it seems that HSBC tend to get matters moving and resolved a lot quicker than HFC.

[dx100uk]

why did you go there

?

[rascal]

I just saw that there was a Resolver function where you can enter your details and log the complaint. I just called HSBC myself though and have submitted another SAR and the form from the FOS. I tend not to post anything on MSE as I find the contributors to be really judgmental rather than factual.

[dx100uk]

you need to do your spreadsheets and the FOS form before you ever alert them you are going for the PPI again.

 

 

HFC will fleece you blind

if you simply say I want my PPI back via that stupid resolver site.

without doing homework first

[rascal]

Hi Im still waiting for Beneficial or HFC to send me my statements. In the meantime HSBC wrote via the Revolver website to say they could not find anything that suggested I had ppi. The account was in my married name (ive been divorced 10 years) so I have sent via recorded delivery some ID and my decree absolute. My question now is because the FOS ruled in HFCs favour - well they said that although they agreed the PPi had been missold they didn't believe I should be refunded (this is from memory again was 5/6 years ago) - when I have the statements and I know all the totals etc. can I proceed to an LBA and then if not successful go straight to the small claims rather than FOS?

[dx100uk]

you could yes

[rascal]

Ive just noticed that my Excel spreadsheet from before is attached within this thread is there any way to extract it I have tried - Im not sure if my work are blocking it? Obviously the PPI amounts will be exactly the same so may not need to wait for the statements in this case.

[dx100uk]

it work yes on a pc?

if do click the file

then save as hfc.xls [you will have to rename it from .PHP

 

 

but that's the old spreadsheet there are better ones now

[rascal]

oh fantastic its worked thank you so much. It appears to have automatically updated the values as well. If I reattach can someone look at it for me please?

[rascal]

LBA sent. Now just to wait.

[rascal]

I've had no response to my LBA although I know it was received as it was sent recorded etc. Was 14 days as of today.