Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

NCF355 v CitiCards


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6446 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

well I've started the ball rolling

 

Wrote with my SAR - (Subject Access Request) letter to Citi Cards (C1 and Citi - two accounts - mine and mrs ncf) just before I went on holiday (just over a week ago - 29/06) and have had the following response:

 

Citi - 'Fill out enclosed form and provide ID' :evil: (duly done)

 

So it's started (I have many,many others to pursue but going for these first as they have smaller current balances - safety measure in case they start closing accounts on me!:evil: )

 

I'll keep you all posted

 

Thanks to everyone here for a great site

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck i've just been offered half back so they are going to pay up.Let us know how you get on.

cheers

andyace

 

 

citicards= £650/settled £650

Alliance and Leicester= £1534/request for payment sent/LBA sent/standard refusal/moneyclaimsent/settled £2003.36

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent my SAR on the 30th June, just got a recorded delivery letter asking for ID etc. Better send that of today.

 

Good luck with you claim?

 

How long are we talking before the claim is resolved? Does anyone have a rought idea?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well,

 

had the copy statements through.

 

Charges =

 

Me - £490

Mrs NCF - £100

 

 

Lovely!

 

Now for the next step

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Update:

 

reply to Mrs NCF's prelim : 'i appreciate this is not the result you would have hoped for,bla,bla' received 26/07 having sent prelim 22/7:x

 

LBA is currently winging its way to them:D

 

Still awaiting reply to my prelim:x

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well,

 

no reply to my prelim letter (though as you will se above we had the standard foxtrot oscar reply to mrs ncf's that was sent at the same time!)

 

So I have just sent off my LBA to the lovely people at Citi

 

Also just found out I can send recorded mail from work, so thats handy!

 

:D

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

just had a letter from 'Brian Smith: Solicitor' (who aks on behalf of CitiFinancial, and they have such a close relationship he uses their headed paper rather than that of a solictor practice)

 

He kindly pointed out that Citi have in fact charged me £515, not the £490 I calculated (earning his crust well then:D )

 

Then he goes on to offer me the diff between what I was charged and £12 charges (how kind)

 

Also says the case will be 'vigorously defended' if I proceed and they will press for the case to be heard in Salford (surprise!)

 

 

They state they are refunding the partial £251 to my account

 

 

So, how do I go about saying to him I'm not accepting?

 

 

Cheers all!

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can send you a copy of the letter I wrote if you like,it worked for me. You could adapt it for your situation.

cheers

andyace

 

 

citicards= £650/settled £650

Alliance and Leicester= £1534/request for payment sent/LBA sent/standard refusal/moneyclaimsent/settled £2003.36

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am watching your posts with interest as I am about to start money claim and I am considering including cash advance handling fees as well as I think I can use the 1999 UTCCR against them??? Good luck keep us posted.

First Direct - Settled in full :eek:

Lloyds TSB - AQ completed Central London CC :confused:

RBS - Settled in full :p

Morgan Stanley - Settled in full :lol:

Capital One - Settled in full ;-)

Citi Cards - Transfered to Mercantile Court 19/10/06

Nationwide - Settled in full 8)

Capital One Acct 2 - Prelim letter

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy - YHM!

 

 

CG - Thanks for the wishes, all the best to you 2!

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

sent you a PM let me know what you think

cheers

andyace

 

 

citicards= £650/settled £650

Alliance and Leicester= £1534/request for payment sent/LBA sent/standard refusal/moneyclaimsent/settled £2003.36

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well,

 

I've written stating I wont accept their paltry offer

 

Interestingly they didnt make any such offer to my wife, just telling her (in 'flubber') that she wouldnt be getting a penny

 

This really p's me off, if they are going to apply this pathetic 'refund the difference between the £XX and £12' policy then it damn well ought to be across the board

 

I believe that this in itself would screw them in court

 

:-x

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I am also at the stage where they have credited mya ccount by the difference of the £25 and the £12 but not surewether to take further or not. Please could you email me a letter that you sent, did you not have to go through moneyclaim or not?

 

I am only claiming £600 and have been crdited £302 today

 

I thansk you all in advance my email is [email protected]

Link to post
Share on other sites

MODS: PLEASE EDIT TO REMOVE THE EMAIL ADDRESS!

 

 

Hi,

 

I've sent you an email with the details of the letter I sent, for which credit goes to AndyAce

 

Dont put your email address in the posts, if you want someone toemail you, PM them and include the email addy in that.:)

 

This is for your own safety as a) the banks are watching and b) your email could be harvested for email marketing !:rolleyes:

 

Hope the mail helps

 

NcF

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot to say check your balance in a few days because they credited the money to my account without notice, no letter explaining why. So you might have the money without knowing it. They even sent me a cheque for the 46 pence I was in credit!

CitiCard actually giving me money, thats something you don't see every day.

cheers

andyace

 

 

citicards= £650/settled £650

Alliance and Leicester= £1534/request for payment sent/LBA sent/standard refusal/moneyclaimsent/settled £2003.36

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ncf355,

 

Have you had a reply from Brian Smith???

I got a really snotty response from. Have a look at Citi’s Threat.

 

Best of Luck with your claim,

 

Hondamad :D

__________________

EGG CC Default Removal: Have reported Egg to Trading Standards, Summery Claim - 2nd Hearing Date 09/10/07. Click here to read posts

Monument CC: received statements, now need to send letters. . . !

BoS Current Account: Settled

Citi Cards: Hhmm seems like I have sued the wrong “entity”. Aaaaahhhhh . . .. oh well back to court I go, and they have settled in full!!!

 

:-D:p:D

This is just advice from me. If you are not sure please seek legal advice. However if what I have said has been helpful, than please add to my reputation by clicking on the scales :D

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any result on this one lets hope its a success story.

cheers

andyace

 

 

citicards= £650/settled £650

Alliance and Leicester= £1534/request for payment sent/LBA sent/standard refusal/moneyclaimsent/settled £2003.36

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope,

 

had a letter from Claire Morrison saying they acknowledge my letter in response to their offer of £156 (I was actually offered £251 by Brian Smith - they cant even get that right!:rolleyes: )

 

Re iterated how they will get the court to allow them to trial in Salford as it was the defendants right:-x

 

So I wrote giving them a further 7 days to settle before I raise the claim and also stated how I find it somwhat unlikely a judge would make the location in their favour due to me being an individual and them being a multi national with massive resources available

 

I'll be posting this 1st class recorded Tuesday AM so if I dont have the full refund by the following wednesday its MCOL here I come:cool:

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update:

 

 

Well, I have had Citi's defence through for mrs ncf's case

 

They have now credited the difference between £12 and what they charged to her account, considering they flatly refused to issue ANY refund in their letter prior to the court action I'm sure that will go down well with the judge

 

Despite the fact they have received 2 copies of the charges list they state in the defence that we have no provided a true breakdown of the costs!

 

'The defendant avers that the Particulars of claim do not particularise either the amount of the claim or the dates upon which the amounts claimed arose and puts the claimant to strict proof of the amount of her claim'

 

(after this,in the next para they state the amount charged was £100 which is the same as in my claim so theyve already answered what they wanted us to prove!)

 

As expected Northampton have transferred the case to MY local court (take note people that are afraid of Mr Smiths threat to get it sent to Salford - this will NEVER happen - unless YOU happen to live in Salford)

 

So Citi's solictors will get a nice little daytrip to the seaside (which of course they wont because they wont go to court)

 

So now I just have to sort out the AQ

 

:cool:

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Giz,

 

I notice your from my neck of the woods!

 

:D

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...