Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • 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
    • Post in Some advice on buying a used car
    • People are still buying used cars unseen, paying by cash or by bank transfer, relying on brand-new MOT's by the dealer's favourite MOT station….
      It always leads to tears!
      used car.mp4


    • Pizza delivery insurance.mp4




      Parcel delivery insurance 1.mp4
      • 2 replies

CCA arrived but its just T's & C's

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5006 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

just received my CCA (late) from Citicards with the 'we do not need to send the signature' clause in the covering letter.


It is just 20 pages of T's & C's.


As they have not complied with the CCA in providing an executed agreement what is the sort of letter I should send them back?




Link to post
Share on other sites

A letter something along the lines of:


Thank you for your response to my request under **s.77 Loan or s.78 credit card** for a copy of my agreement, however, what you have sent to me is only the Terms and Conditions.


The document that you are obliged to send me is a true copy of the executed agreement that contained all of the prescribed terms, all other required terms and statutory notices and was signed by both your company and myself as defined in section 61(1) of CCA 74 and subsequent Statutory Instruments. If the executed agreement contained any reference to any other document, you are also obliged to send me a copy of that document.


I now await your forwarding to me a TRUE copy of my signed agreement which I expect to receive within the next 14 days.


Yours faithfully



** delete as appropriate



I have no legal training my knowledge comes from my personal life experiences

Please help keep the forum alive by making a donation

Link to post
Share on other sites

The "executed agreement" i.e. the document you signed (though they are entitled under regulations not to include the signature, signature box or signature date), and the agreement i.e. the Terms & Conditions are two entirely separate things.


Citi are playing games again - the legislation states "executed agreement":


"78.—(1) The creditor under a regulated agreement for running-account credit, within the prescribed period after receiving a request in writing to that effect from the debtor and payment of a fee of 15 new pence, shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it, together with a statement signed by or on behalf of the creditor showing, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer,—


(a) the state of the account, and

(b) the amount, if any, currently payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor, and

© the amounts and due dates of any payments which, if the debtor does not draw further on the account,"


Time for a further complaint to the Office Of Fair Trading regarding this.


Citi have not discharged their obligations under the act and request, though obviously they will suggest otherwise.



2/3 of my post on this thread are applicable to you:



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

here is their letter claiming they don't have to supply the signature details!


P.S. just re-read the 'agreement' they sent me and it actually mentions a totally different type of card from the one I received in 2006 !!




Edited by lochlisa
Link to post
Share on other sites

Under the regulations they are entitled to exclude the signature, signature box, signature date.


Therefore you are entitled to a copy of the "executed agreement" minus these details as listed under s78(1) CCA, or at least an exact copy of it's full text.


What Citi have given you is a copy of the Terms & Conditions which has been titled "agreement" and had your name and address added. Normally T&C so have somewhere in the text that "this is a consumer credit agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974".


However the "executed agreement" and "agreement are not the same thing". Notice how they refer in their accompanying letter to the "agreement", and not "executed agreement".


And as you have pointed out, the T&C belong to a different card to the one you applied for, and would like incur a different rate of interest than the one present on yours.


So, yep, same old Citi shinanigans. I would suggest that they have not discharged their obligations under the act, that you still await a true copy of the "executed agreement" - therefore put Citi on notice, complain once more to the OFT, and enquire with Trading Standards as you are legally entitled to a copy of this document.


You are probably requesting a copy of the "executed agreement" to ascertain whether it includes all the necessary prescribed terms, obviously with this entirely different document you are unable to do so.

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

Gonna PM you.

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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...