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
      • 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

Statutory Demand - CitiFinancial


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5499 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

Thank you for putting your post here, you are more likely to get a guide on how to combat this in the debt section.

 

That said people need to be aware of the kind of actions that Citi are doing with regard accounts, and indeed what happens when they sell them on.

 

Section 78(6) is active as Citi are not fulfilling s78(1) requests within the statutory period, so the account should not have been sold let alone being the subject of a statutory demand.

 

If the Statutory Demand has been sent from a court, I would write to that court requesting a set aside hearing - turn up at the hearing, stating that the s78(1) request hasn't been completed properly - I have the Office Of Fair Trading documents which outline what completes it, they should not have added any interest, charges or updated your credit file but likely have which will be another reason as to why the amount is disputed etc.

 

You should be able to find your local county court using this:

 

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/HMCSCourtFinder/

Edited by Enron

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

Havent dealt with them beforehand, just had general reading on them.

 

So the best course of action would be to wait till receiving court papers, then register your request for a set aside hearing.

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

Many thanks for clarifying that - you learn something every day.

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

Wouldnt they also need the original executed agreement as part of any proceedings under the civil procedure rules to commence action of any kihd?

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

Alot of older executed agreements held by Citi have problems with prescribed terms, format, wording etc..... some would say this is the reasoning behind the misleading of customers by sending recent Terms & Conditions out in response to s78(1) CCA as they don't want this to become common knowledge.

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

Likely to be either a Peoples Bank Connecticut, or Associates executed agreement then.

 

Mine was from 1996 and they managed to retrieve the front when Trading Standards got involved (after 9 months of enforcing the agreement whilst they legally were barred including defaulting it), but generally if they haven't supplied it first time round its likely they either dont have it or its not unenforceable.

 

Follow Rory32s advise regarding the Statutory Demand, then we can look at claiming charges.... as the amount of penalty charges is more than the balance its certainly worth doing and i'll lend you my assistance in that.

 

Find your MP as well, people are being severely affected by Citi's improper actions - and no doubt your credit file has been defaulted etc. The Office Of Fair Trading need to be made aware of this, and investigate what is going on here.

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

Sounds good, I would also be tempted to state that 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.

 

Heres the documents you'll need relating to this:

 

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/telso/1-8.jpg

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/telso/Image2.jpg

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c104/telso/Image3.jpg

 

I can give you an uncensored copy of page 1 if you wish by PM, which specifically lists Citi Financial Europe Plc as the creditor.

  • Haha 1

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...