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 
        • 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

Hax vs Citi Cards


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6180 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

Hi folks - just looking into starting my claim for charges on my Citi Card account.

 

Basically, I had a £650 limit, hit some difficulties and ended up owing in excess of £1850 :/ I've had a year of reduced interest which has helped me get the amount owing down to £1400 - but they've just started me back on the "high" interest rate and are sending me letters demanding the excess back so I thought it time to take action - so am preparing my request for data letter.

 

I was just wondering though, with my limit being £650 and Citi Cards effectively lending me another £1200 on top of that through their charges, have they ever been brought up for breaching the "responsible lending" rules/guidelines that banks are supposed to adhere to?

 

I had previously asked Citi Cards on a couple of occasions before the debt reached anywhere near the £1800 mark if there was anyway they were able to strike a deal with me and stop charges so that I may make lower repayments and not incur any more penalites, but I was told point blank that unless I made payments of the amounts specified that I would continue to incur the charges, regardless.

 

To my mind, they had been told that I was struggling, it was obvious from my repayment "history" that I was struggling, but they still kept piling the charges on and effectively increasing the amount owed to them. This sounds far from responsible to me.

 

Anyway - just a thought that had entered my tiny little mind... Back to the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) letter :)

 

Cheers folks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi hax and welcome to the world of Citi claimants:)

 

basically your story is the same as most of us just the amounts are different - when you send your SAR they will ask you for proof of ID - if you want to you can send the ID off with your SAR and a line saying that is what you are doing.

have a read around some of the older Citi threads so yuou are ready when the battle starts - if you eed any help just ask.

 

Good Luck -

Consumer Health Forums - where you can discuss any health or relationship matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Well, I've been a bit slow in getting things moving properly - mainly because the rest of my life has been pushing forward for attention.

 

Anyway, I've just waded through my past statements and found that I have £1275 of charges although at one point Citi did refund 3 lots of £25 of charges so I'll be putting in a claim for an even £1200.

 

One thing that has me curious though is that during the time when Citi were piling on the charges at a rate of about £50 a month (1 late payment and 1 overlimit @ £25 each) I was also receiving a huge interest charge - a large part of which would have been due solely to the large sum of fees that I had incurred. My credit limit was only £650 but Citi inflated the amount owed to in excess of £1950 at it's worst - at this particular point in time I was also being charged £40 for a month's interest.

 

Just wondering if I should somehow be claiming for this interest that was levied against the charges? If I hadn't been making any payments to Citi at all then I would estimate that my highest balance would have been in excess of £2500 - but the payments I was making seemed to be just about covering the interest and maybe a little extra too - but not enough to stop Citi then slapping on another £50 of charges the gits - meaning that I was simply fighting a losing battle with them :/

 

(I agree that I should be paying interest on the amount that I'd actually borrowed/spent and interest on top of that interest - but it's not like I had ever actually "had" the money from the charges)

 

Thanks for any help/advice!

 

Hax

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Well, I wrote to Citi and for my first letter, I decided to try and take a less official route leaving open the option to take a more official route at a later date if necessary.

 

Today, I received this reply:

 

Thank you for taking the time to write to us about the above account. I will be looking into your query for you.

 

I am sorry that you have had cause to complain. The issues that you have raised will be given prompt attention and I will respond directly to you on behalf of our Chief Executive.

 

As a general guide we aim to fulfil the following service timeline:

 

* Acknowledge all complaints within 24 hours of receipt.

* Provide a full written update to you within 10 working days.

* 80% of all Section 75 claims to be remedied within 21 days, subject to verification.

 

I would make you aware that you may refer your complaint to the FLA at any point during the first 8 weeks of your complaint, at the following address:

 

The Compliance Manager

4th Floor Imperial House

15-19 Kingsway

London

WC2B 6UN

www.fla.org.uk

 

I have enclosed a copy of our complaints procedure for you. In the meantime, if I can be of any further assistance, please feel free to call me

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

Mark Clibbens

 

Anyway, I'm just wondering what this "Section 75" is all about... From what I can tell, it's all to do with recovering costs under the insurance offered when making purchases with a credit card. This most definitely does not apply to me here - so I'm assuming that it's just a standard response letter for covering most situations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...