Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The important thing to know is that MET - although they will send you threat after threat about how they will divert a drone from Ukraine and make it fall on your home - hardly ever do court. Even in the very small number of cases where they send court papers, if the Cagger defends, they drop the matter before the hearing.  They have no real intention of putting their rubbish claim before a judge.  The aim is to find motorists who are terrified of the idea of going to court and who will give in when the court papers arrive. Thanks for doing the sticky and well done on finding F18's thread.  Do what they did.  On the first page - I think post 19 - there is the address of the CEO of BP.  Write to them, lay it on thick about being genuine customers in the various premises, mention the small kids, the very short stay time, attach any proof of purchase - and request that they get the invoice cancelled.
    • Thank you for that, I have obviously already been convicted so I think the appeal lodged is for the previous offence? Sorry if that doesn’t make sense. I suppose my only concern is that weds I go there and they don’t let a stat dec happen. If they do then as you say and solicitor says it’s highly likely I’ll be happy with the outcome. But I’m being told there’s no guarantee for the stat dec to be hard Weds as that’s not what the hearing is proposed for. Solicitor has stated that you can put a stat dec before a magistrates at any time so it shouldn’t be a problem.   
    • I re-read the extract from your  solicitor's letter this morning and think I might understand what they have in mind. I believe (and it’s only a guess) their strategy is this: 1.    You will make your SD 2.    You will enter fresh pleas to the four charges (not guilty) but will offer to plead guilty to speeding on the understanding that the FtP charges are dropped. 3.    If this is accepted they will attempt to argue that the two offences were committed “on the same occasion” 4.    You will be sentenced for those two offences (the sentence depending on whether the “same occasion” argument succeeds). They also have a plan in the event that your offer at (2) is unsuccessful and you are convicted again of the 2xFtP charges (and so face disqualification under “totting up”): 5.    They will make an “exceptional hardship” argument to avoid a ban. 6.    If that is unsuccessful they have already lodged an appeal in the Crown Court against that decision. (This is the only “appeal” I can think of). 7.    They plan to ask the court to suspend your ban pending that appeal. If I’m correct, I’m surprised the Crown Court has agreed to accept a speculative appeal (against something that hasn’t happened). The solicitor says this is to lodge it within the normal timescales. But you will have 21 days from the date of your conviction (which will be next Wednesday) to lodge an appeal with the Crown Court, so there is no need for a speculative appeal. I have to say that an application to have your ban suspended pending an appeal is unlikely to succeed. The Magistrates Court is unlikely to agree to it for one very good reason: if they make such an order (suspending your ban until your appeal is heard), all you need to do is not to pursue the appeal and the Magistrates order suspending your ban will remain in place. Hey Presto! No ban and no need for you to trouble with an appeal. Perhaps he will ask for your ban to be suspended for (say) three months or until your appeal is heard (whichever occurs first). This potentially creates a problem because if your appeal is not heard in that time either your ban will kick in or you will have o go back to court to get the suspension extended. But the solicitor obviously knows more about these things than I do. I would want to be very clear about this solicitor’s fees and what he proposes to charge you for. As I said, there is absolutely no need to lodge an appeal with the Crown Court. That can be done if and when it becomes required. But I am still firmly of the opinion that it is overwhelmingly likely that you will not need to progress beyond point 2 above. Point 3 is optional and I don’t know whether he solicitor has made It clear to you that the only thing you will avoid in the event of success is three penalty points. You will still be fined for the second offence and your driving record will still be endorsed with the details, but no penalty points will be imposed. Do let us know how it goes.  
    • I'm really trying, but worst case I can't find what are my options?
  • 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

Statutory Demand - CitiFinancial / 1st credit / Connaught collections


alf2000
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5582 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

I have just got a Statutory demand relating to Citifinance, I am not sure if it looks legit, it lists 1st credit as the creditor and also connaught as the creditor and it is over an alleged debt to Citi Finance!

It also says

"[your local court]" in brackets for where it should say the court that is supposed to be dealing with it.

To have it set aside it says I have 18 days from when it was served

To do so I have to apply to the court mentioned in section A - where it does not give a court - it justs says [your local court] and it must be supported by an affidavit, and that the forms are available from the local court?!?!?!

This was waiting for me in a pile of post and is dated the 21/1/09 but there is no postage date on the envelope, so according to this it is all ready too late for me to do anything.

The alleged debt is for £752

I requested a CCA from Citi 6 months ago and they sent out terms and conditions printed from their website a few months later.

I dont owe Citi this money - plus they owe me nearly £1.5k in penalty charges which Citi have refused to pay me.

What do I do?

Is it too late to do anything? the letter appears to imply that it is too late now, but I have only just got it and have no idea what I need to do and have no time to do it!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I received a very dodgy looking SD from Connaught (on behalf of 1st Credit) a while ago that related to a citi card.

At the time I had not CCA'd citi so it's slightly different to yours but I sent a CCA to Connaught and they replied saying that they had closed the file and returned it to 1st Credit.

I haven't heard a word since.

 

As you had already sent a CCA to citi I would say you could send the 'Account in Dispute ' letter to Connaught.

 

Just out of interest did the SN have a blue triangle holding all the papers together?

If it did I bet a pound to a penny it isn't for real,just another one of their scare tactics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep the blue triangle is there lol

Well they have me worried, Citi and 1st credit have already been informed that it is in serious dispute and I thought I remembered 1st credit giving up on it and passing it back as I informed them that Citi had failed to provide a CCA etc.

I am just worried that this may stand up and they might say its too late for me to defend myself and its my fault that I did not get it in time etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any advice on how to apply to set it aside - will this still be an option or will the court refuse as it is not within the 18 days that is on their letter?

 

Also who do I report them to for abuse of the process? the courts? OFT FAS?

As it stands they could claim that they did not abuse the process and had all intentions of following it up!?!

 

Thanks everyone for you help, it will make sleeping tonight easier :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Abuse of process within your app for a set aside.(Court)

Complaints that they have not followed procedures to the FOS.

Citifinancial are known for their disregard of their obligations-you can see many examples in the citi forum.

for info about setting aside see here ;

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/162131-statutory-demands-service-post.html

 

 

 

 

and here;

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/162131-statutory-demands-service-post.html

 

 

 

Also lots of info here too ;

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dca-legal-successes/103839-cca-1st-credit-connaught.html

Edited by MARTIN3030

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

Alf....I would always recommend applying to set it aside, You basically have 18 days from the date you received it to set aside, if you set it aside outside the 18 days then I think it costs £30 to do this. (you can claim this back in costs)....

 

You can find forms 6.4 (set aside) and 6.5 (affadavit) here in this link - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dca-legal-successes/86067-getting-statutory-demand-set.html

 

If this was already disputed then this a wholly vexatious and an unlawful claim on their part, and I can tell you now a judge will NOT be pleased with Connaughts. (who are part of 1st Credit)

 

Once you have filled out the forms, you need to get them 'sworn in' at your local court (ring them first to find out if they handle bankruptcies/insolvencies as some County Courts don't) getting them 'sworn in' is usually free at a local county court, at a solicitors it will cost £5 and at central London courts I have heard it cost £12.

 

If it was me in your shoes I would definitely get this set aside.

 

The debt is totally disputed.

 

This has been raised with the original creditor but despite the bona-fide dispute the debt has been passed on. This I believe to be a completely vexatious and unlawful action and an abuse of the Insolvency service.

 

The debtor is currently going through the process of reclaiming in excess of £1500 of excessive penalty charges.

 

I believe this to be a frivolous and unlawful action as the demand does not state a county court on it, and nothing has been 'served'.

 

Judge Boggis QC - RE AWAN - [2000] BPIR 241

'In my judgment, bankruptcy is one of the most serious forms of execution that can be brought against a debtor. In any bankruptcy proceedings it is, in my view, absolutely clear that the provisions as to service must be followed exactly. - JUDGE BOGGIS QC - SITTING AS A JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT

I have tried to call the named person on the demand 3 times (dates and times of calls) and have been unable to speak with this person who I believe does not exist.

 

A statutory demand must show a named person or persons from the Creditor or their agent/solicitor whom you can contact directly. This is Rule 6.2 of The insolvency Rules 1986.

This means that if the statutory demand doesn't give the name of a person you can speak to then it is not valid. If you try to contact the named person and they won’t put you through then it is also invalid.

 

I gracefully request that the demand is dismissed, and in light of the frivolous and unlawful nature of this demand and the upset this has caused me and my family, I request the judge order the claimant pay my full costs and makes an indemnity award and orders the claimant to remove any adverse default information that has been put on my files. I also request that the judge grants a bankruptcy restraining order in my favour against this company.

 

Hammonds (a firm) v Pro-Fit USA Ltd [2007] EWHC 1998 (Ch)

 

In this case, Mr Justice Warren confirmed that it was usual for an indemnity award to be made:-

 

27 So far as disputed debts are concerned, the practice of the court is not to allow the insolvency regime to be used as a method of debt collection where there is a bona fide and substantial dispute as to the debt. Save in exceptional cases, the court will dismiss a petition based on such a debt (usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner).

 

You need to submit your costs 24 hours before the hearing....

 

You can claim back at £9.25 per hour for your research and work on the case

Mileage at 40p per mile

Postage

Parking

Claim back your time off work too....

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Alf can you start a thread in the Citi forum:

 

CitiCards - The Consumer Forums

 

This is getting more and more serious, especially if 1st Credit are issuing statutory demands after Citi have not properly fulfilled CCA requests.

 

1st Credit are aware of Citi not being legally entitled to enforce agreements where they haven't fulfilled s78(1) requests as a couple of use have written to them to state that accounts are in dispute - the accounts shouldn't even be being sold to 1st Credit.

 

Write to 1st Credit stating the account is in dispute, send a CCA request also to them (dont sign these letters), outline as well the problem you are experiencing with Citi.

 

What i'm going to suggest is what a number of use have done, contact your constituency MP outlining what has happened, you can find your local one by enterring your postcode here:

 

UK Parliament - Find Your MP

 

I have it confirmed from the Office Of Fair Trading that they are not legally entitled to enforce agreements at all when they have not complied with a s78(1) request.

 

Inform him/her that you are aware of many other instances where Citi has acted improperly in this manner, and request that he writes to the head of the Office Of Fair Trading - a Mr. John Fingleton

 

Citi should not even be adding interest, penalty charges etc let alone updating peoples credit files, defaulting accounts and selling on the account whilst s78(6) CCA is active, the third party then further attempting to enforce the agreement.

 

There are things going on behind the scenes with regard to this, but I would highly recommend you do the above as the more pressure on this issue the better.

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

P.s. if you need help reclaiming your charges through the courts as well let me know, as we have it down to a fine art.

 

Citi normally employ barristers but are finding it hard in claims where the draft order has been adopted - courts normally accept requests for these to be made as they bring all matters to the fore and save valuable court time.

 

Citi in each and every claim where the draft order has been adopted have refused to supply a full breakdown of their figures, they even go as far as falsifying pre-estimate exhibits which they submit to court (which we have cast iron proof of).

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

1st Credit are aware of Citi not being legally entitled to enforce agreements where they haven't fulfilled s78(1) requests as a couple of use have written to them to state that accounts are in dispute - the accounts shouldn't even be being sold to 1st Credit.

 

 

First Credit are professional Debt Buyers. They regularly seem to purchase alleged debts that are unenforceable or even Statute Barred. They are fully aware of the Status of the debt portfolios they purchase ALLEGEDLY, but because of the vast amounts of potential profit to be made from people who are unaware of their LEGAL rights its a gamble that most DCAs are happy to take.

Its only when people query the enforceability of the alleged debt that it becomes a problem for the DCAs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alot of us Citi customers are in the same boat, Citi have enforced agreements whilst s78(6) CCA is active adding interest, charges etc. I just dont think they give a monkies.

 

That said its never wise for Citi solicitors to lie to an official body when you have the documented proof to expose it, and as such things should hopefully start moving on this issue soon.

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

Is this okay?

 

The debt is totally disputed.

 

This has been raised with the original creditor but despite the bona-fide dispute the debt has been passed on. This I believe to be a completely vexatious and unlawful action and an abuse of the Insolvency service.

 

 

The original creditor has not completed a section 78(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 request submitted on xx/xx/xxxx, s78(6) Consumer Credit Act 1974 is active preventing the original creditor from enforcing the agreement at all either with or without a court order until it has completed the request.

 

The debtor is currently going through the process of reclaiming in excess of £1500 of excessive penalty charges.

 

I believe this to be a frivolous and unlawful action as the demand does not state a county court on it, and nothing has been 'served'.

 

I gracefully request that the demand is dismissed, and in light of the frivolous and unlawful nature of this demand and the upset this has caused me and my family, I request the judge order the claimant pay my full costs and makes an indemnity award and orders the claimant to remove any adverse default information that has been put on my files. I also request that the judge grants a bankruptcy restraining order in my favour against this company.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alf they do not have to put the Court name on it.

 

An SD should wherever possible be served in person. However service by 1st class post is acceptable if they can prove attempt at personal service. By admitting you have received the SD it is deemed as being served on you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to put the dates in to replace the xx/xx/xxxx - day/month/year

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...

 

 

 

I have put my complaint in to the OFT, as well as complaining to the district judge about their conduct and requesting a restraining order.

 

They have just edged my account over the £750 mark so that they could send it out, its a clasic example of how these people work. I think they were originally asking for around £400!!! Plus they would not send me a CCA or give me back the £1.5k that they took in charges.

I am going to push to get this back next, but I might need some help there as I bottled out when I got to the court stage.

 

As they owe me over £750 can I issue a stat demand back? :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...