Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Citi Cards - Card holder deceased


hagenuk
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6505 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

Good Morning All

 

Just received the following from Citi Financial.

 

My wife's Father died in April and we wrote to all his creditors with copies of the Death Certificate and have received varied replies, some thoughtful and sensitive and some no so. However, this one from Citi just about takes all.

 

If you were in any doubt about why they act as they do then read on.

 

Not only did they address my wife (who has a pretty obvious girl’s name) as "Mr" they also addressed her by late Fathers surname, her old maiden name.

 

My Father-in-Law did not have any defaults on his account; however the outstanding balance is over £6K.

 

 

 

 

 

5 July 2006

 

 

Mr (Obvious Girls Name!) (Deceased Name!)

AnyStreet

AnyTown

AnyCounty

Postcode

 

Dear Mr XXXXXX

 

Re: 1234 1234 1234 1234* Mr XXXXXXXXXX(Deceased)

 

We acknowledge the receipt of the death certificate for Mr XXXXXXXXX.

 

Unfortunately, this account was not covered by Repayment Protection Insurance, leaving an outstanding balance of £XXXX.XX

 

Should you have any further questions regarding this account, please do not hesitate to contact us on 0870 909 4431** or logon to our website Citibank UK - Current Accounts, Savings Accounts, Investments, Bank Accounts, Credit Cards, Banking, United Kingdom.

 

Your sincerely

 

 

(Illegible scrawl)

 

Operations Administration

 

 

* Please quote the full 16-digit account number on all correspondence.

** Calls may be monitored and/or recorded for training and quality purposes.

 

 

 

 

Now I am not especially sensitive but even I can see that this is a pretty poor way to treat a family who have just lost a father. He was 79 and as you can see from the above, this debt was not insured. Notwithstanding any claim Citi may attempt against the estate, if it were up to me they can whistle for it. If they extend credit to people in their 70's and do not take further steps to protect themselves against loss then they are being remarkably short sighted.

 

I do not advocate irresponsibility toward borrowing or debt but it appears to me that they should look again at their lending criteria and ensure they have adequate cover for this one inescapable eventuality.

iGroup (GE Money) - AoS Filed late, defence late, amended defence also late despite extra time requested and granted.

Vanquis - Claim issued, no AoS or Defence received

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only gambling debts legally "die" with the debtor. If there is enough money in the estate then the debts must be paid out of that. There is a specific order that monies must be paid and rather unsurprisingly HM Govt get first pick after the Testamentary Expenses are taken care of, then there is a list of who gets paid and in what order.

 

If the deceased was the sole account holder then nobody else is legally liable for the debt but credit card companies have been known not to let this little fact out and attempt collection from the deceased relatives.

iGroup (GE Money) - AoS Filed late, defence late, amended defence also late despite extra time requested and granted.

Vanquis - Claim issued, no AoS or Defence received

Link to post
Share on other sites

The total outstanding is in excess of £20k. He was not an ordinary 79 year old man, if there is such a thing! No pipe and slippers for him. He was a prominent local politician and very active right up until the end. He was out the night before speaking at a function and died early the following morning.

 

We are in the process of dealing with the financial side of the estate, something we are familiar with because my Father died in November. Luckily a family friend and director of one of my companies is a solicitor so we are getting help there without cost.

 

However, he left a widow, my Mother-in-Law and she wants to keep the house. Thankfully the rules governing property ownership are quite clear and the equity is not counted as part of his estate, so she will not be forced to sell up to pay the debts. As they were unsecured debts they have to join the queue - and guess what, it's a long one!

 

 

iGroup (GE Money) - AoS Filed late, defence late, amended defence also late despite extra time requested and granted.

Vanquis - Claim issued, no AoS or Defence received

Link to post
Share on other sites

You couldnt make this up.

 

Tact diplomacy and understanding are words that Citi have never heard of

 

 

:mad:

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

 

Not only did they address my wife (who has a pretty obvious girl’s name) as "Mr" they also addressed her by late Fathers surname, her old maiden name.

 

How insensitive:eek: . How difficult is it really to get someone's name correct when writing :rolleyes:

 

I'd be sorely tempted to put the letter back in the mailbox, in its original envelope with a note written on it saying "not known at this address".:mad:

Do you have a website? Add the following code to add a link to The Consumer Action Group:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk

The Consumer Action Group

Reclaim your rights as a consumer and reclaim your unfair bank charges! Free site with letter templates and helpful forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn! I wish I had thought of that.

 

The thing is, she wrote the letters to inform Citi and the others of the death of her father, it should have been a simple matter to reply to the named person who wrote the letter rather than the deceased, but clearly not for Citi.

iGroup (GE Money) - AoS Filed late, defence late, amended defence also late despite extra time requested and granted.

Vanquis - Claim issued, no AoS or Defence received

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that is pretty funny.

 

The following did happen to us though.

 

We got two phone calls followed by a Statutory Default Notice for my late Father-in-Law from Morgan Stanley. He was one month behind (well, that and dead of course!) and they went for the default! One month! They were informed by telephone twice and received the same letter that the others did, along with a copy of the death certificate yet it still did not register with them.

 

I wonder if Experian will amend his credit record?

iGroup (GE Money) - AoS Filed late, defence late, amended defence also late despite extra time requested and granted.

Vanquis - Claim issued, no AoS or Defence received

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...