Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

citi A word of encouragement for citi claimants


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5159 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

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.

Abbey - Claim 1

full hearing 22 Feb 07 - Settled in full £710 :D

Abbey (Claim 2)

full hearing 22 Feb 07- Settled in full £4000 :D

Abbey (Claim 3)

Court date 27 June -

Capital One (claim 1)

£467 Settled in full 20 Sep :D

Capital One (claim 2)

£72 refunded 19 Aug :-D

Associates (Citicards)

claim 8 Aug/judgment by default 30 Aug/set aside hearing 9 Oct/Stay denied, ordered by Judge to reveal breakdown of charges andfull hearing 24 May/FULL DISCLOSURE ORDERED BY 8 MARCH/JUDGE TO STRIKE OUT DEFENCE AS NON-COMPLIANCE/DEFENCE STRUCK OUT PAYMENT IN FULL REQUIRED IN 14 DAYS

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 328
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

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`.

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

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

 

ICO – Information Commissioner's Office

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

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?

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Abbey - Claim 1

full hearing 22 Feb 07 - Settled in full £710 :D

Abbey (Claim 2)

full hearing 22 Feb 07- Settled in full £4000 :D

Abbey (Claim 3)

Court date 27 June -

Capital One (claim 1)

£467 Settled in full 20 Sep :D

Capital One (claim 2)

£72 refunded 19 Aug :-D

Associates (Citicards)

claim 8 Aug/judgment by default 30 Aug/set aside hearing 9 Oct/Stay denied, ordered by Judge to reveal breakdown of charges andfull hearing 24 May/FULL DISCLOSURE ORDERED BY 8 MARCH/JUDGE TO STRIKE OUT DEFENCE AS NON-COMPLIANCE/DEFENCE STRUCK OUT PAYMENT IN FULL REQUIRED IN 14 DAYS

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Abbey - Claim 1

full hearing 22 Feb 07 - Settled in full £710 :D

Abbey (Claim 2)

full hearing 22 Feb 07- Settled in full £4000 :D

Abbey (Claim 3)

Court date 27 June -

Capital One (claim 1)

£467 Settled in full 20 Sep :D

Capital One (claim 2)

£72 refunded 19 Aug :-D

Associates (Citicards)

claim 8 Aug/judgment by default 30 Aug/set aside hearing 9 Oct/Stay denied, ordered by Judge to reveal breakdown of charges andfull hearing 24 May/FULL DISCLOSURE ORDERED BY 8 MARCH/JUDGE TO STRIKE OUT DEFENCE AS NON-COMPLIANCE/DEFENCE STRUCK OUT PAYMENT IN FULL REQUIRED IN 14 DAYS

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Abbey - Claim 1

full hearing 22 Feb 07 - Settled in full £710 :D

Abbey (Claim 2)

full hearing 22 Feb 07- Settled in full £4000 :D

Abbey (Claim 3)

Court date 27 June -

Capital One (claim 1)

£467 Settled in full 20 Sep :D

Capital One (claim 2)

£72 refunded 19 Aug :-D

Associates (Citicards)

claim 8 Aug/judgment by default 30 Aug/set aside hearing 9 Oct/Stay denied, ordered by Judge to reveal breakdown of charges andfull hearing 24 May/FULL DISCLOSURE ORDERED BY 8 MARCH/JUDGE TO STRIKE OUT DEFENCE AS NON-COMPLIANCE/DEFENCE STRUCK OUT PAYMENT IN FULL REQUIRED IN 14 DAYS

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 !

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

My Cases

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/14777-rbphot-lloyds-tsb.html?highlight=rbphot

 

My useful posts

 

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

 

;) The Masses Will Always Prevail

 

Rbphot

 

Lloyds TSB, (£2.5k) Data Protection Act-150606, Prelim letter-050706, 2nd LBA-140706, Money Claim submitted 010806(6QZ51069), Claim Agknowledged 040806:D , AQ submited today-070906

Lloyds TSB Amex, (£60) Data Protection Act-150606, 1st LBA-110706, 2nd LBA - 040806, SETTLED 50% of amount.:D

Citi Cards, (£995) Data Protection Act-110706, Prelim letter-210806, LBA - 040906

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

HSBC 1st preliminary letter £3692 10.10.06 LBA sent 24.10.06

HSBC 1st Preliminary Letter £3280 10.10.06 LBA sent 24.10.06

Capital 1 SADR 11.10.006

Halifax Visa SADR 11.10.06

CITI SADR 12.10.06

HSBC Gold card SADR 23.10.06

Link to post
Share on other sites

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??????

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

HSBC 1st preliminary letter £3692 10.10.06 LBA sent 24.10.06

HSBC 1st Preliminary Letter £3280 10.10.06 LBA sent 24.10.06

Capital 1 SADR 11.10.006

Halifax Visa SADR 11.10.06

CITI SADR 12.10.06

HSBC Gold card SADR 23.10.06

Link to post
Share on other sites

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. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Halifax (current a/c)- £3705.00

04/09/06 - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent - lost by P.O.

20/09/06 - Prelim letter sent (special delivery)

30/09/06 - Reply to Prelim; Received statements

04/10/06 - LBA sent (special delivery)

14/10/06 - Offer received - £962 (err..no)

17/10/06 - MCOL issued: £3705 + £777.11 interest

19/10/06 - Moneyclaim acknowledged w/intent to defend

28/10/06 - SETTLED IN FULL!!

To be continued: Capital One(charges); Citi/Associates(charges); GMAC(ERC); GEMoney(charges); TMG(charges)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...