Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx for your feedback. That is the reason I posted my opinion, because I am trying to learn more and this is one of the ways to learn, by posting my opinions and if I am incorrect then being advised of the reasons I am incorrect. I am not sure if you have educated me on the points in my post that would be incorrect. However, you are correct on one point, I shall refrain from posting on any other thread other than my own going forward and if you think my post here is unhelpful, misleading or in any other way inappropriate, then please do feel obliged to delete it but educate me on the reason why. To help my learning process, it would be helpful to know what I got wrong other than it goes against established advice considering the outcome of a recent court case on this topic that seemed to suggest it was dismissed due to an appeal not being made at the first stage. Thank-you.   EDIT:  Just to be clear, I am not intending to go against established advice by suggesting that appeals should ALWAYS be made, just my thoughts on the particular case of paying for parking and entering an incorrect VRN. Should this ever happen to me, I will make an appeal at the first stage to avoid any problems that may occur at a later stage. Although, any individual in a similar position should decide for themselves what they think is an appropriate course of action. Also, I continue to be grateful for any advice you give on my own particular case.  
    • you can have your humble opinion.... You are very new to all this private parking speculative invoice game you have very quickly taken it upon yourself to be all over this forum, now to the extent of moving away from your initial thread with your own issue that you knew little about handling to littering the forum and posting on numerous established and existing threads, where advice has already been given or a conclusion has already resulted, with your theories conclusions and observations which of course are very welcomed. BUT... in some instances, like this one...you dont quite match the advice that the forum and it's members have gathered over a very long consensual period given in a tried and trusted consistent mannered thoughtful approach. one could even call it forum hi-jacking and that is becoming somewhat worrying . dx
    • Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant .... I said DCBL because I was reading a few threads about them discontinuing claims and getting spanked in court! Meant  YOU  Highview !!!  🖕 The more I read this forum and the more I engage with it's incredible users, the more I learn and the more my knowledge expands. If my case gets to court, the Judge will dismiss it after I utter my first sentence, and you DCBL and Highview don't even know why .... OMG! .... So excited to get to court!
    • Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other! One other point to note, the more I read, the more I study, the more proficient I feel I am becoming in this area. Make no mistake DBCL if you are reading this, when I win in court, if I have the grounds to make any claims against you, such as breach of GDPR, I shall be doing so.
  • 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

citi- not responding at all **WON**


oggy1
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5246 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 to you all,

i am suprised at the way citi are dealing with these cases.

have added all my charges, plus interest and sent them requests for repayment.

have not heard or recieved any replies at all.

sent them final lba xmas and now going to issue court papers against them.

Oxford county court is listing all credit card cases as i have filed and won against crap1

reading the threads citi fight more than the others then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Citi will fight tooth and nail and try every trick in the book not to pay out, but if you stick to your guns eventually they will.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi,

nothing at all from citi, have checked to make sure they have signed for the letters.

3 lba letters sent and not even a reply. going to issue court papers soon , just wondering if to do stat 8% or ci rate ,

has anybody had any success with ci???

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heard that all money claim filed claims are being stayed, so hopefully you've gone the N1 route.

 

Get in touch with me when you receive an allocation questionnaire as i'll have a few things for you to submit at this time.

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

thanks enron, just recieved the letter from the court to say it is being served, so will keep you posted.

yes i did n1 route and oxford court is not staying these cases at the moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me know how you get on.

 

From the point of view to Citi claims, you should be able to effectively argue against a stay.

 

The current court case relatves purely to current bank account overdraft charges, and not credit card charges. On the issue of CC charges there is already an OFT report in place, which the defendant has obided by in lowering its charge to £12 per default.

 

The issue here is whether the charge of £12 which is at the maximum level outlined by the OFT is an accurate reflection of the defendants costs. And the fact that the conflicting cost pre-estimates submitted to courts by the defendant need further exploration by means of a full breakdown of the figures used as a basis to calculate the pre-estimates. (for which the draft orders serve this quite well).

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

  • 2 weeks later...

sorry gizmo and enron have overlooked this lately while waiting for a response to court papers.

they have until friday the 25th jan to acknowledge the claim.

the address i sent the requests to was citi cards, po box 54, Salford, Manchester. M5 3BP

Link to post
Share on other sites

The PO Box goes directly to their Salford Offices, as i've got headed note paper from Mr.Brian Smith with both addresses on.

 

Request judgement on the 26th Jan if you hear nothing from them.

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

Hi Oggy1,

 

It appears I'm in a similar position to you.

 

I was awarded judgement by default but then the court pointed out that because I'd given them the PO Box address it may not be enforceable. Has this happened to you?

 

I'm also trying to fight off them setting aside the case.

 

Have you got any updates on your case?

 

PatsyTheCat x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

have just recieved a letter and payment from citi.

 

the payment is only a small part of the claim and they say they are not paying interest eeven though court papers have been issued and the amount they have paid is the balance between £25.00 chages and the £12.00 they are now allowed.

 

i am sending the cheque back and informing them that the whole amount is due plus interest and costs.

 

any comments would be welcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it,

 

I had a case against pixmani where they owed me for the item I returned under their guarantee + court costs + interest and other costs.

 

they initially (in the final days) sent me just the cost of the item, and said that's all they would send and its the F&F offer and would I instruct the courts to stop the action, I wrote back saying to send the remainder that I am claiming for otherwise I would continue with the action, of course within a couple days I had received complete and full payment :)..

 

They wouldn't pay anything unless they know they have to .. so go for it :)..., they wont risk a CCJ for a few quid, they are just trying to score some points back I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks kev , i hope so because the case has started they will have to refund costs etc, i wonder what they will think when the cheque gets returned.

congrats on getting your claim sorted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just send it back, its a standard Citi tactic.

 

Likewise they'll also include text from a judgement in their favour when you get the bundle from them. Another scare tactic which doesn't amount to anything, as previous claims don't set a legal precident.

 

Its likely that they'll go all the way to the hearing, and risk incurring the CCJ.... but let me know when you get to AQ stage as i'll have alot of stuff for you then.

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

  • 1 month later...

rang the court today as i had not heard anything and citi did not file any defence at all and the court manager advised me to flie for judgement asap.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good. Go for it, but don't be surprised if Citi, on receipt of the judgment notification, apply for a setaside. They frequently do this and sometimes get away with it.

 

Let's hope you're fortunate and they cough up.:)

 

Els

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly what I thought.

 

Citi have a habit of losing mail at what could be considerred a conveinent time.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...