Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
    • Unless I've got an incorrect copy of the relevant regulation: The PCN is only deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch "unless the contrary is proved" in which case date of delivery does matter (not just date of posting) and I would like clarification of the required standard of proof. It seems perhaps this hasn't been tested. Since post is now barcoded for the Post Office's own tracking purposes perhaps there is some way I can get that evidence from the Post Office...
  • 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

kano24 v Citicards


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6200 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...