Brothers HSBC/DG Stayed cLaim - credit Card - no Enforceable paperwork provided

[DonkeyB]

Sorry, of course.

 

Well, as there is no evidence of a default notice, they cannot terminate.

 

Unless they use s92 of the CCA and give you three months notice –*but they must do exactly that, quoting s92, and give three months’ notice!

 

As ever, they play dirty and tell outrageous lies. Be careful.

 

I caught them out badly in court once with a Cagger, and they caved in. Their trick then was to send evidence with applications to the court, but not to the defendant. But you really need your wits – and the facts – about you.

[tifo]

Well, as there is no evidence of a default notice, they cannot terminate.

 

Unless they use s92 of the CCA and give you three months notice –*but they must do exactly that, quoting s92, and give three months’ notice!

 

No DN, 2 months notice and no mention of s.92 ....... just termination.

[DonkeyB]

Just keep a log of all this. They are hoisting up a nice gallows for themselves at present.

 

ANy use of s92 should also be mentioned in the T&Cs.

 

They also lied about costs – costs CAN be awarded in small claims, though it’s not the norm.

 

I wish you had them making those statements on tape. Please record any conversations you have with them.

[tifo]

They also lied about costs – costs CAN be awarded in small claims, though it’s not the norm.

 

I know costs can be awarded in small claims, that's what DG said, i.e. THEY can claim costs under the contract (an agreement they can't locate) but we can't. So it's one way costs to them.

[DonkeyB]

Rubbish! If they lose, and their unreasonable behaviour warrants it, the judge can award costs against them. It’s a myth that small claims = no costs. There’s a famous case where the costs in a small claims case were astronomical.

 

They only costs they can normally recover are the costs of issuing the claim, so once again they are telling lies.

[Mike_hawk]

Tifo

 

Guess you've worked out that extortionate costs orders arise from pre allocation hearings, such as sj apps.

 

From the limited info on your thread the case would require an app to proceed at post 6 months.

 

One of the reasons i never advocate an app to strike our pre allocation is the inherent risk of costs. Not sure what to suggest for yours beyond preparing an unless to counter any sj in the future.