That is appalling. Absolutely appalling. That leaves us open to ID theft. They aren't allowed to give account/address details to other people.

Report them. Strongly.

Yep, submitted a complaint to the Information Comissioner about 2 weeks ago with supporting paperwork.

Shame that I didn`t retain the guys statements and submit that via the ICO, however the fact that I kept copies of correspondence with Citi including his address and account number are probably enough.

In addition I did send a letter to this customer by special delivery via Citi, however have not heard from him as yet. Most likely the people in customer services can`t read `Strictly Private & Confidential - to be opened by account holder only`.

In addition you may wish to submit any complaint to the Information Commissioner who can be reached here:

ICO – Information Commissioner's Office

thanks to Bankfodder,I have got it sussed.All the letters are away!!

Let's just sit back and wait for the brown stuff to hit the ventilation equipment!!

by now most if not all interested members will have read of the fiasco that was our case in Northern Ireland,where a CITI Financial employee swore under oath that the breakdown of charges given to the judge(but not to us) was true and accurate.

CITI have been ordered by the judge in Keren's case to disclose all this information about how they arrived at the level of charge-if this doesn't tally with what they gave to the judge in our case,can the CITI guy be done for committing perjury?

Well, I'm still waiting with baited breath........

when's the deadline Keren?

They have to have all the money I am claiming paid into the court by the end of next Monday. They then have another 14 days to submit the defence and produce the breakdown of the costs.

I cannot wait to see that breakdown!!

I expect they are looking to come up with a 'cunning plan' not to give it to me.....

I have come across citibank henanigans only today , (so you are all to blame for no housework being done ) Ias I said in another thread, what the hell is happpening with this firm of solicitors and citibank themselves? its absolutely appalling, but your judge Keren is the man LOL I cant wait to see how this will turn out and hopefully LTWFB will be able to do something about his case

Is this any use http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/26095-bank-credit-charges-eec.html?highlight=rbphot

Is this any use http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/26095-bank-credit-charges-eec.html?highlight=rbphot

I used it in my case,and citi persuaded the judge that it wasn't fair to compare like for like charges with other countries.....

Sent my mcol in last week and just waiting to see what they do. Is there any advice someone can PM me if I need to do anything different?

thanks

Not really much you can do...but await their defence because they are almost certain to do that.

Lets just see whats in there when you eventeally get it !

When I was digging out the bank charges in EEC countries, I looked into the EEC contract laws a bit but it was too much to sort thorugh and understand for me, but I'm sure is someone who understands the legal stuff looked into it there was mention of providing fair contract terms across member states, and penilties for companies that broke the EEC rules.

the argument they used was that the cost base in each European country was different,and that this meant the penalties were different in each country.Lot of crap,really, but the judge bought it hook,line and sinker....

If Kerens breakdown differs to yours LTWFB surely you would be able to have Judgement set aside and claim indemnity damages and costs?

this is the thing-but the judgement wasn't against me as claimant,it was a case of being claim thrown out,so I don't think there's a question of a set aside.

But of course this all hinges upon citi disclosing their precious information-which at this point is open to conjecture!!!

any wonder they are ambushing claimants at court with non-disclosure?Perhaps they know it won't stand up to scrutiny??????

They are a......es but you knew that already! When you know the outcome of Kerens case you could always write to them and tell them that you intend to issue a further set of Proceedings in their home court instead and see what they do. They will threaten you with abuse of process but you can exhibit the 2 sets of costings if they dont compare. The DJs at Salford are some of the most sympathetic I have ever come across

Well - here's a thing. I've been quietly going along with my claim (it's not much , so currently haven't started up a thread of my own - unless I win) as I wanted to keep the focus on these main threads. Anyway, I also got the argument back about Kissick and wrote back to say 'we know all about it' and we believe it's under appeal anyway.

Well - today got a very sharp letter from Mr B Smith saying:

"To remind you, my client's case is also based on the law, albeit a different interpretation of the same and is not simply being defended to waste your time, as you put it.

For the record, Mr Kissick has not appealed his case, he has simply written to the District Judge and made representations. These have no legal force whatsoever. In the event that he does issue an appeal, my client will deal with the matter appropriately".

And, that was the end of the letter! My first impressions were a really p****d off bloke who is getting inundated and has become a bit hot under the collar. If he was an external solicitor - I suspect they'd be wondering about his legal advice as he must be costing Citi far more than he is saving. I mean, my claim is v. small - a couple of hundred quid (not saying as no doubt, he'll identify me). As it happens he is a paid employee me suspects and is ensuring he keeps his job by showing how busy and useful he is to the company.

for the record-He HAS appealed the case.I should know.I filed the appeal using form 130 with the court.

Another lie, Brian!!!The appeal is on points of law-Citi have no representations to make about it.It's up to the judge to decide whether or not the lower court judge erred in the way the case was handled.

by now most if not all interested members will have read of the fiasco that was our case in Northern Ireland,where a CITI Financial employee swore under oath that the breakdown of charges given to the judge(but not to us) was true and accurate.

 

CITI have been ordered by the judge in Keren's case to disclose all this information about how they arrived at the level of charge-if this doesn't tally with what they gave to the judge in our case,can the CITI guy be done for committing perjury?

I'm not sure if perjury is simply "Lying in court" or if it directly applies to criminal cases. If it does apply to all courts, then it's possible that the employee could be charged; however the Defence will simply cast him as a hapless nobody - a witless looby who was sent to court to defend a simple case and became flustered under the eye of the judge and made statements as a result which he had no authority to make. I've no doubt whatever that he'd get off a perjury charge. Which is probably the view that the CPS would take and would avoid the charge anyway by reccommending a police caution. (And of course he'd lose his job).

If he's a solicitor, then he would probably plead that he took the information from CITI in good faith and as part of the Solicitor/Client relationship, show the documents he had in his posession, and get off it that way.

would be interesting to find out for sure-after all,an oath is an oath.....

To have comitted perjury, the following elements need to be in place:

1. "lawfully sworn as a witness", i.e. having taken an oath,

2. "in a judicial proceeding", i.e. can be criminal, civil, inquest, tribunal etc.,

3. "made a statement material to that proceeding",

4. "which he/she knew to be false or did not believe to be true".

Elements 2 & 3 are clearly satisfied. If element 4 is also satisfied (he would have to known it to be untrue OR not believe it to be true), then assuming the statement was made under oath, your man has comitted perjury.

Attempting to or actually perverting the course of justice is the charge which would probably cover the matter if all of the perjury tests were not met.