Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Documents arrived today dated 27th March.  This is a cc taken out a long time ago (2008) and they don't seem to have been able to provide a copy of a CCA agreement, just reams of print outs of lines of texts from old bank statements, default notices etc.   
    • Documents finally arrived today from PRA group.  New day have sent me lots of paperwork, copies of default letters and statements, print out of what looks like a CCA that would have been completed on online, IP address as signature.  This debt is not too old, so possible this is the true copy of agreement ?  Not sure what my defence would be beyond irresponsible lending. 
    • pers i wouldn't.. all you need to know is in the posts of that thread....that being section 127(3) of the CCA refers. if under a CCA return, the 'creditor' claims its a recon, it must not contain any details like a sig, tickbox, or typed name (whether you signed physically or by online tickbox) 1. those are not necessary in a recon, so why inc them? (faked??) 2, it cant thus be a recon!!, it must be a copy of the 'original' from the original creditor, not from a debt buyers filing cabinet. they shouldn't not be 'mixing' some original docs from the OC with crap from their filing cabinet, claiming its ALL a recon! because some of it is faked. just remember there are far more docs like NOA and a DN that are as equally important to a court claim of 'this debt is enforceable'. never rely solely upon the dodgy agreement argument.
    • India has thousands of small gold refineries which are facing more competition from big players.View the full article
  • 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
      • 160 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

Elsinore v Citi Cards***WON & PAID***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6085 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

  • Replies 160
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

They didn't comply in my case to the draft order, so it's pretty much a certainty that they won't in yours.

 

You'll have to start putting your bundle together, if you need any help let me know and I can give you my standard dislosure list which will give you an idea of what to include.

 

Many thanks, Enron, I appreciate that. I'll PM you later.

 

Els

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Bundles filed and served today

.

I now know how quickly a fortnight can pass and how time-consuming and difficult it is to put bundles together! Particular thanks are due to Gizmo, Gary and Enron for their assistance.

 

I really do feel that it's abusive to be made to jump through hoops by arrogant and obstructive banks.

 

Citi's defence to my claim is contemptibly inadequate and I hope that I get an opportunity to tell them so in court.

 

Rant over.

 

Short holiday coming up, so b***s to the lot of 'em!:)

 

Els

Link to post
Share on other sites

They won't comply if the judge has requested any breakdown of figures from them to validate their pre-estimate figure of £12.88.

 

Needless to say you could possibly argue that they have something to hide.

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

Needless to say you could possibly argue that they have something to hide.

:o Whatever makes you say that?!? Surely not....;)

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It all boils down to their figure of £12.88.

 

Citi had an opportunity to prove their figures correct at the mercantile court, which would have been of benefit to themselves by quashing all penalty charge claims of this nature. Instead of doing this they settled, which would lead you to conclude they are not confident in their own figure being scrutinised.

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

Official Order (see post 120) received from the court on Saturday 28th, two days after my bundle was due in! Good job the judge gave us a handwritten copy!:D

 

Els

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi you guys hope you don't mond me butting in at this time. I was in court this am. I originally filed a small claim in Nov. sent to CITI's Sunderland office. The case was not defended so I won by default. Sent Extract for payment Rec. Dely. to Sunderland ( this is where I sent my cc payments) Nothing happened So Handed the job to sheriff officers. Again no reply so now had sheriff officer hand papers to Dundee office. Now action started court recd. notice CITI Had never recd. original papers ( never mind receipts of rec.dely.) So new case came up. Again no one turned up at court so Judge told clerk to have CITI send in defense by today. Believe it or not I never received any defense ( I was meant to get a copy) So once again off to court. Before the action started the lawyer for CITI asked me if I received a copy of the defense when I told him he said he had not heard from CITI so had nothing himself. When the case came up the judge took quite a time reading all the paperwork then asked the lawyer for the defense after much discussion. The judge said he would continue the case where upon I said that CITI were known for wasting courts time etc. and as they had already lost previously this was going to take l;onger. The judge said he was sorry for all the time wasted and said to the lawyer the Mr. Travis had to appear next Friday on Perth sheriff court. On leaving the court room I talked to the lawyer a nice young nman and he said Citi would not be happy with the result. Any one else been that way and what was the result. Any ideas of what I should do or say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're not butting in texel, I enjoy a good laugh on a Friday afternoon!

 

Well, citi aren't doing very well lately. JDAdams won by default and Citi had to pay the bailiffs.

 

I don't think you need to do anything but wait and see if Citi blow it again next Friday. If DT turns up I expect he'll get the hairdryer treatment from the judge!:D

 

Els

Link to post
Share on other sites

On second thoughts, one thing you can be doing, is to work out how much all this messing about has cost you. When you finally win, you can ask the judge to award costs and order Citi to pay. There is an acceptable method for calculating costs which any reasonable judge would find hard to refuse.

 

Els

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mackenzie Hall

30 The Foregate

Kilmarnock

KA11JH 4th May 2007

 

Dear Sirs

 

Reference XXXXXXX

 

I refer to your ‘Final Notice’ letter dated 28th April 2007.

 

I wrote to you on 12th August 2006 asking that you refrain from making any requests for payment, as the amount claimed was in dispute. Since that time you have sent me 4 letters, 3 red postcards and attempted to reach me by telephone on numerous occasions.

 

It is clear from your ‘Final Notice’ letter that you have not been kept informed by your principal, 1st Credit Ltd (not First Credit Limited as stated in your letter).

 

The sum of £542.52 which you are chasing, as an alleged debt owed to 1st Credit Ltd, is entirely spurious, as it consists of unlawful charges imposed by the original lender Citifinancial Europe plc. CitiFinancial have, so far, admitted the sum of £429.00 which was remitted to 1st Credit Ltd on or before 14th December 2006.

 

The remaining balance of £113.52 is the subject of a County Court claim issued by me against CitiFinancial on 21st November2006 and which I expect will shortly be concluded in my favour.

 

Consequently, I shall not be making any payments to you now, or at any time.

 

I respectfully suggest that you return the file to 1st Credit Ltd

 

Yours faithfully

 

Els

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hearing at noon today.

Citi failed to attend.

Judgment awarded in my favour.

 

Judge Jackson very hacked off with banks' abuse. He had a bet with his court clerk that, of six cases scheduled for this morning, no banks would show up. He was right!:D

 

Els

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Done !!! :D:grin::D

 

hondamad

__________________

EGG CC Default Removal: Have reported Egg to Trading Standards, Summery Claim - 2nd Hearing Date 09/10/07. Click here to read posts

Monument CC: received statements, now need to send letters. . . !

BoS Current Account: Settled

Citi Cards: Hhmm seems like I have sued the wrong “entity”. Aaaaahhhhh . . .. oh well back to court I go, and they have settled in full!!!

 

:-D:p:D

This is just advice from me. If you are not sure please seek legal advice. However if what I have said has been helpful, than please add to my reputation by clicking on the scales :D

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I am butting in again. I was also in court today Perth sheriff court in the final hearing against CITI. I spent hours making up new fihures as this case was originally filed in Nov. they lost then and when I sent the sheriff officers in they said they had never received the paperwork even though I had the rec.dely receipts they were allowed a new trial. Cutting the story short the hearing wasx today and I had received the defence papers so spent hours getting all the answers. I arrived at co8urt for 9.30. eventually my case was called where is the representative from CITI? nowhere to, be seen.So I had to wait until 11.30 to be told at 12.30 I had to return at 2 pm. At 2.30 the case was read out and as noone from CITI was present CITI lost by default. The only thing was that I had to accept the original figures which was £ 475 and I had reworked them along with later charges for 2007 and expenses for having to make four trips to court. Which meant I had to pay someone to look after the animals. It is not good to leave a farm with no one there because anything can happen!!! I now had the figures over £ 1000. The judge said I could not get expenses over £ 75.00 regardless of what it costs me. I do not like this judge!!! I told him that the previous judge had said that because of the way CITI had messed me around that he was going to change things and I would get better treated. The only thing it was not that judge to day and todays said he did not pay any attention to what other judges said!!!. So we are back to the sheriff officers again this time I am going to sue Dundee branch wher the Scottish sheriff officers have jurisdiction. I will have to start a new case for 2007 charges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I am butting in again. I was also in court today Perth sheriff court in the final hearing against CITI. I spent hours making up new fihures as this case was originally filed in Nov. they lost then and when I sent the sheriff officers in they said they had never received the paperwork even though I had the rec.dely receipts they were allowed a new trial. Cutting the story short the hearing wasx today and I had received the defence papers so spent hours getting all the answers. I arrived at co8urt for 9.30. eventually my case was called where is the representative from CITI? nowhere to, be seen.So I had to wait until 11.30 to be told at 12.30 I had to return at 2 pm. At 2.30 the case was read out and as noone from CITI was present CITI lost by default. The only thing was that I had to accept the original figures which was £ 475 and I had reworked them along with later charges for 2007 and expenses for having to make four trips to court. Which meant I had to pay someone to look after the animals. It is not good to leave a farm with no one there because anything can happen!!! I now had the figures over £ 1000. The judge said I could not get expenses over £ 75.00 regardless of what it costs me. I do not like this judge!!! I told him that the previous judge had said that because of the way CITI had messed me around that he was going to change things and I would get better treated. The only thing it was not that judge to day and todays said he did not pay any attention to what other judges said!!!. So we are back to the sheriff officers again this time I am going to sue Dundee branch wher the Scottish sheriff officers have jurisdiction. I will have to start a new case for 2007 charges.

 

 

 

Still good news though!:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all.

 

My own role in this success was merely to turn up at the hearing.

 

The key to it all was being able to persuade the judge at the allocation hearing to adopt the Draft Order for Directions in its entirety. For that I am indebted to Bankfodder and Gizmo.

 

It was almost an anti-climax, because I had all my arguments ready to give Citi a run for their money....Ermm, that should, of course, be a run for MY money!:D

 

Els

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done You,

Another one bites the dust:D :D :D

I have just had to do a search to find out where you where but well worth it once I read the result The bank must have known who they were dealing with, So glad your on my side.

 

Pen

:x if i have been off any help to you please click my scales

 

cases won

28th July Single Claim for bank charges against LTSB, £6,800 WON with CI to date of Judgement

 

18th July Joint Claime against LTSB £7,800 WON with CI to date of Judgement.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all.

 

My own role in this success was merely to turn up at the hearing.

 

The key to it all was being able to persuade the judge at the allocation hearing to adopt the Draft Order for Directions in its entirety. For that I am indebted to Bankfodder and Gizmo.

 

It was almost an anti-climax, because I had all my arguments ready to give Citi a run for their money....Ermm, that should, of course, be a run for MY money!:D

 

Els

 

 

Hi,

 

 

Wasted costs order, perhaps?

 

 

Jeff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...