Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
  • 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
      • 160 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

kano24 v Citicards


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6178 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,

 

I had a credit card with 'the associates' that I closed a couple of years ago. I am trying to find out contact details so that I can write to them about charges.

 

The problem is, I cant find out information about them anywhere. Does anybody know if they have been bought out or merged with another company?

 

Thanks

Lloyds TSB - £2808 Settled in full 15/11/06

HSBC - Settled £810.56 in full 11/11/06

BarclayCard - Data Protection Act sent 05/09/06

Failed to privide information - Complaint issued to the Information Commissioners Office 12/10/06

NatWest - £54 settled in full 15/11/06

Capital One - Prelim Letter sent 16/10/06

LBA sent 30/10/06

CitiCards - Prelim Letter sent 29/09/06

LBA sent 10/10/06

Claim issued 04/12/06

Acknowledged 07/12/06

StyleCard - Cheque for £130.00 recieved 20/10/06 - FULL SETLLEMENT!

RFS - Settled in full £494 08/1/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I had an Associates card too, it was, if I remember correctly, sold on to Citibank (Citicards).

 

Hope that helps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I have sent my preliminary letter to CITICARDS as I too had an ASSOCIATES card. Received a reply about the £10 fee so don't make my mistake and pay the fee straight away to avoid delays.

 

Their address is

 

RICHARD COOKE

DATA PROTECTION OFFICER

CITI CARDS

CITIFINANCIAL EUROPE PLC.

1 EXCHANGE QUAY

SALFORD

MANCHESTER

M5 3EA

 

Hope this helps

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Hi All,

 

I have been going backwards and forwards with CitiBank over the past month or so after asking for my charges back, and have just recieved their final response. I must say that what they said did stop me in my tracks a bit but after speaking with Bankfodder, I am going ahead and issuing a claim tomorrow.

 

Bankfodder has asked me to post what they have said just incase anybody else has recieved the same reply.

 

 

"Following a review of your situation, I have been made aware that you are currently fulfilling an IVA for your overall indebtedness. In order for you to have been accepted onto an IVA your creditors, including ourselves, must have accepted short settlement of the debt you owed on your accounts. For this reason we will not honour your request for a refund of default fees, which may have been levied, as this will mean reversing the IVA agreement and you benefiting twice"

 

 

Any thoughts on the argument that I have recieved from CitiBank would be much appreciated before I submit the claim.

Lloyds TSB - £2808 Settled in full 15/11/06

HSBC - Settled £810.56 in full 11/11/06

BarclayCard - Data Protection Act sent 05/09/06

Failed to privide information - Complaint issued to the Information Commissioners Office 12/10/06

NatWest - £54 settled in full 15/11/06

Capital One - Prelim Letter sent 16/10/06

LBA sent 30/10/06

CitiCards - Prelim Letter sent 29/09/06

LBA sent 10/10/06

Claim issued 04/12/06

Acknowledged 07/12/06

StyleCard - Cheque for £130.00 recieved 20/10/06 - FULL SETLLEMENT!

RFS - Settled in full £494 08/1/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Citi are just unbeleivable - as you will be aware only 75% of creditors have to agree to proposal - the rest have no choice

Have a look here for info on claiming when in an IVA

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/26925-business-account-over-19-a.html

Consumer Health Forums - where you can discuss any health or relationship matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Claim issued 04/12/06. Let the battle commence! :)

Lloyds TSB - £2808 Settled in full 15/11/06

HSBC - Settled £810.56 in full 11/11/06

BarclayCard - Data Protection Act sent 05/09/06

Failed to privide information - Complaint issued to the Information Commissioners Office 12/10/06

NatWest - £54 settled in full 15/11/06

Capital One - Prelim Letter sent 16/10/06

LBA sent 30/10/06

CitiCards - Prelim Letter sent 29/09/06

LBA sent 10/10/06

Claim issued 04/12/06

Acknowledged 07/12/06

StyleCard - Cheque for £130.00 recieved 20/10/06 - FULL SETLLEMENT!

RFS - Settled in full £494 08/1/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have already explained to you, there are two aspects to this and to dealing with Citi's letter.

Firstly, as their charges are unlawful in that they are unenforceable law, it can be said that they have contributed to your indebtedness and in this way they are partially responsible for the problems caused to your other creditors.

When city finally pay you back your charges -- which they will do even if it has to be by force through the courts, there is no doubt that you will have to account to your creditors. Citi are part of the IVA agreement. They will not be able to seize the repayment for themselves. They will be obliged to share it out with the other creditors. Furthermore as the repayment of the money to you will reduce or do away altogether with your debt to them then they may find themselves out of the loop altogether.

If it can at all be shown that it was their unlawful charges which created your problems and therefore created the problems with your other creditors for which they themselves have had to suffer then we do find ourselves with some very interesting questions indeed as to Citi's general liability.

Citi's logic is flawed and their letter really is nonsense. Was it written by city or was it written by a solicitor? If it was written by a solicitor I would have no hesitation in sending it to the court and also to the Law Society and asking them whether they consider that it is a proper letter to be sent out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a letter from Lloyds TSB solicitors today who are very concise and to the point, whereas Citi do seem to come up with alot of invalid points in an effort to defend their client.

Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you completed your IVA yet?

If not then none of your creditors will actually have received any payment.

In which case your supervisor could simply not pay anything to Citi. If they still owe you money then seek that through the courts. The IVA has nothing to do with your overall claim.

I need to read the rest of your thread though.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Citi's logic is flawed and their letter really is nonsense. Was it written by city or was it written by a solicitor? If it was written by a solicitor I would have no hesitation in sending it to the court and also to the Law Society and asking them whether they consider that it is a proper letter to be sent out.

 

This is what I felt compelled to write to them recently:-

 

Such inconsistencies in your actions indicate that if you are not acting upon sound, professional, legal advice, then you should be. If you are acting upon professional. legal advice, you should perhaps be seeking that advice elsewhere.

 

Elsinore

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for the delay in replying. Have been away from work for the past few days.

 

In answer to your question Bankfodder, the reply was not from a solicitor but from Mark Clibbens in the office of the chief executive. I havent bothored replying to him because this was the third rejection letter I recieved from them. Just issued the court claim. I guess its now a case of waiting and seeing what happens.

 

Thanks for all your advice guys.

Lloyds TSB - £2808 Settled in full 15/11/06

HSBC - Settled £810.56 in full 11/11/06

BarclayCard - Data Protection Act sent 05/09/06

Failed to privide information - Complaint issued to the Information Commissioners Office 12/10/06

NatWest - £54 settled in full 15/11/06

Capital One - Prelim Letter sent 16/10/06

LBA sent 30/10/06

CitiCards - Prelim Letter sent 29/09/06

LBA sent 10/10/06

Claim issued 04/12/06

Acknowledged 07/12/06

StyleCard - Cheque for £130.00 recieved 20/10/06 - FULL SETLLEMENT!

RFS - Settled in full £494 08/1/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looked on MCCOL, Citicards acknowledged 07/12/06. They are not wasting anytime so far!

Lloyds TSB - £2808 Settled in full 15/11/06

HSBC - Settled £810.56 in full 11/11/06

BarclayCard - Data Protection Act sent 05/09/06

Failed to privide information - Complaint issued to the Information Commissioners Office 12/10/06

NatWest - £54 settled in full 15/11/06

Capital One - Prelim Letter sent 16/10/06

LBA sent 30/10/06

CitiCards - Prelim Letter sent 29/09/06

LBA sent 10/10/06

Claim issued 04/12/06

Acknowledged 07/12/06

StyleCard - Cheque for £130.00 recieved 20/10/06 - FULL SETLLEMENT!

RFS - Settled in full £494 08/1/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Well, Looks like Citicards are slipping a bit!

 

They acknowleded my claim pretty quick but failed to submit a defence within 28 days, so I requested judgement yesterday and just checked MCOL and that has been issued today! :D:D:D:D

Lloyds TSB - £2808 Settled in full 15/11/06

HSBC - Settled £810.56 in full 11/11/06

BarclayCard - Data Protection Act sent 05/09/06

Failed to privide information - Complaint issued to the Information Commissioners Office 12/10/06

NatWest - £54 settled in full 15/11/06

Capital One - Prelim Letter sent 16/10/06

LBA sent 30/10/06

CitiCards - Prelim Letter sent 29/09/06

LBA sent 10/10/06

Claim issued 04/12/06

Acknowledged 07/12/06

StyleCard - Cheque for £130.00 recieved 20/10/06 - FULL SETLLEMENT!

RFS - Settled in full £494 08/1/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I have just spoken to the infamous Brian Smith and asked him when I could expect my money.

 

Said that he would still be putting in a defence. When I asked why he had not done it within the time limit he replied "er, Im not quite sure".

 

Warrant of applied for 11/01/07!

Lloyds TSB - £2808 Settled in full 15/11/06

HSBC - Settled £810.56 in full 11/11/06

BarclayCard - Data Protection Act sent 05/09/06

Failed to privide information - Complaint issued to the Information Commissioners Office 12/10/06

NatWest - £54 settled in full 15/11/06

Capital One - Prelim Letter sent 16/10/06

LBA sent 30/10/06

CitiCards - Prelim Letter sent 29/09/06

LBA sent 10/10/06

Claim issued 04/12/06

Acknowledged 07/12/06

StyleCard - Cheque for £130.00 recieved 20/10/06 - FULL SETLLEMENT!

RFS - Settled in full £494 08/1/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't see the judge accepting the defence late.

 

If they have been unprepared or let it slip through the net thats Citi's fault not yours.

Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well,

 

I applied for the warrant on 11/01/06, and recieved a letter from Brian Smith at Citicards stating that they had 'mislaid' my claim and would be putting in an application for judgement to be set aside.

 

Have just checked the MCOL site and status of my warrant states 'rejected'

 

Looks like MCOL has set aside the judgement, so I will await the paperwork to come through.

 

It makes me furious that a multinational company such as Citicards can get away with abusing the court system this way.:-x

 

Still, It has made me more determined to fight them every step of the way!

Lloyds TSB - £2808 Settled in full 15/11/06

HSBC - Settled £810.56 in full 11/11/06

BarclayCard - Data Protection Act sent 05/09/06

Failed to privide information - Complaint issued to the Information Commissioners Office 12/10/06

NatWest - £54 settled in full 15/11/06

Capital One - Prelim Letter sent 16/10/06

LBA sent 30/10/06

CitiCards - Prelim Letter sent 29/09/06

LBA sent 10/10/06

Claim issued 04/12/06

Acknowledged 07/12/06

StyleCard - Cheque for £130.00 recieved 20/10/06 - FULL SETLLEMENT!

RFS - Settled in full £494 08/1/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe ringing them and bringing it to their attention was not the best move .We do continually advise people not to phone the banks / solicitors .

 

Keep us posted please

When you want to fool the world, tell the truth. :D

Advice & opinions of Janet-M are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any

doubts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok,

 

Recieved a 'Notice of tarnsfer of proceedings to another county court' notice this morning. Reason given was that an application to set aside judgement had been made. Follwing text was written by Brian Smith -:

 

"The claiment is claiming as a debt monies he purports to have paid to the Defendant by the way of bank charges. The amount of his claim excluding fees is £1359.17 made up of principal and interest. My client operated an account with the claiment. He failed to make his payments [unreadable] using the credit facility and my client eventually charged the account off, and sold the debt amounting to £1593.27. The claiment therefore owed my client more than he alleges it owed him. Moreover he us basing his claim on a misreading of common law and contract law. My client, notwithstanding it failed to lodge a defence in due time, has a complete defence to this action and respectfully requests that the judgement in default be set aside"

 

What should I do? Should I reply to this now or wait for something else from the court? Any help gratefully recieved!

Lloyds TSB - £2808 Settled in full 15/11/06

HSBC - Settled £810.56 in full 11/11/06

BarclayCard - Data Protection Act sent 05/09/06

Failed to privide information - Complaint issued to the Information Commissioners Office 12/10/06

NatWest - £54 settled in full 15/11/06

Capital One - Prelim Letter sent 16/10/06

LBA sent 30/10/06

CitiCards - Prelim Letter sent 29/09/06

LBA sent 10/10/06

Claim issued 04/12/06

Acknowledged 07/12/06

StyleCard - Cheque for £130.00 recieved 20/10/06 - FULL SETLLEMENT!

RFS - Settled in full £494 08/1/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, It has been transferred to my local county court

Lloyds TSB - £2808 Settled in full 15/11/06

HSBC - Settled £810.56 in full 11/11/06

BarclayCard - Data Protection Act sent 05/09/06

Failed to privide information - Complaint issued to the Information Commissioners Office 12/10/06

NatWest - £54 settled in full 15/11/06

Capital One - Prelim Letter sent 16/10/06

LBA sent 30/10/06

CitiCards - Prelim Letter sent 29/09/06

LBA sent 10/10/06

Claim issued 04/12/06

Acknowledged 07/12/06

StyleCard - Cheque for £130.00 recieved 20/10/06 - FULL SETLLEMENT!

RFS - Settled in full £494 08/1/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's now up to the Court to consider Citi's application for a setaside. You can object to Citi's application but it is likely to suceed. The Court may order directions to both parties or it might set a date for a directions hearing.

 

If you want to object to the setaside application I suggest you ask on here for assistance. The Site Helpers and Mods will guide you in the right direction.:)

 

Elsinore

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got a letter from court today. Date for the setaside hearing is on 1/2/07!

Lloyds TSB - £2808 Settled in full 15/11/06

HSBC - Settled £810.56 in full 11/11/06

BarclayCard - Data Protection Act sent 05/09/06

Failed to privide information - Complaint issued to the Information Commissioners Office 12/10/06

NatWest - £54 settled in full 15/11/06

Capital One - Prelim Letter sent 16/10/06

LBA sent 30/10/06

CitiCards - Prelim Letter sent 29/09/06

LBA sent 10/10/06

Claim issued 04/12/06

Acknowledged 07/12/06

StyleCard - Cheque for £130.00 recieved 20/10/06 - FULL SETLLEMENT!

RFS - Settled in full £494 08/1/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...