Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Excellent news! Thread title updated. Please do consider a donation in light of the help received here. The help we give is free, but try telling that to our server hosts!
    • Hello dx100uk, After months of waiting for a response I finally got a reply and I must say it was the worst 4 months of my life the - fear of the unknown. So, they wrote back and said I was in the wrong BUT on this occasion they  would not take action but keep me on file for the next 12 months. It. was the biggest relief of my life a massive weight lifted -  I would like to thank you and the team for all your support
    • I have contacted the sofa shop who are sending someone out tomorrow to inspect the furniture. I suspect if anything a replacement will be offered although I would prefer a refund. Few photos of the wear in the material, this is how it was delivered.  
    • Yup, for goodness sake she needs to stop paying right now, DCA's are powerless, as .  Is it showing on their credit file? Best to use Check my file. All of the above advice is excellent, definitely SAR the loan company as soon as possible.
    • Hi all, I am wandering if this is appealable. It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and the it was rejected. Basically there was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van. The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st. I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st. I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car. When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder.  I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day. I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took. There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space. I would count those as 3 bays? In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read. In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van. I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo. I have pasted the appeal and rejection below. Many thanks for looking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is my appeal statement: As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st. I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached. When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension. There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st. I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached. I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week. I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there. I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice. As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted. Many thanks.   This is the text from the rejection: Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space. I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street. I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended. The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief. The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations. Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements. Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted. I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes. Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN. Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN: You should now choose one of the following options: Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024. After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable. Or Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge. Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to. The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge. If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.   Gee st pdf.pdf
  • 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

Northern Ireland Citi claimants read in


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6202 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

this is VERY important to people claiming in NI against CITI

 

1.elements of the NI judiciary have got it into their heads that £12 is fair and "recommended by the OFT ".This seems to be blithely accepted as gospel,despite the OFT report stating otherwise

 

2.Citi DO NOT have to give you prior notice of evidence they shall be depending upon in court

 

3.A judge is FULLY ENTITLED to accept "secret evidence" given in the form of undisclosed documents,and to accept the validity thereof without any further investigation.

 

3.Points of law appealed using the Human Rights Legislation and Statute regarding overriding objective do not amount to anything in civil cases.

 

4.It may be prudent for anyone contemplating action against CITI in NI to either file an action via the English Courts using anyone whom you know who lives there and who will allow you to use their address for paperwork from the court,asking for full disclosure of how their charges are made up,or else take the ex gratia payment and leave it at that.

 

 

Learn from experience,take it on board and change tack.

  • Haha 1

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi everyone

tell me if im wrong but is there not a danger this could have repercussions for anyone in northern ireland claiming from any of the banks. bad news travels fast in this wee place and if we know about this then so do they.

regards john.

no because there has been no settlement on bank charges and the £12 is not a cap but merely an amount the OFT feels acceptable anything over this they are prepared to get involved with the case. That does not make it right if when disclosed the charge is less than £12

if this has helped please click my scales

 

cheers

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

"1.elements of the NI judiciary have got it into their heads that £12 is fair and "recommended by the OFT ".This seems to be blithely accepted as gospel,despite the OFT report stating otherwise"

 

Typical of this embarrassingly deferencial wee country. So many peeps are far too willing to tug the forlock to anyone who gives the slightest impression of actually having some knowledge of what they're on about.

 

Including the judges, it seems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys,

 

Just found this thread, it's a bit dissapointing for me as I have (as I thought) a biggish claim( or two) going in against these guys. I do however have a question about it that might save the day for me. My account(s) have been passed off to Cabot. They tell me that they now own the debt, are they likely to defend against this in the same way that Citi would?

 

Any Ideas

 

Thanks

 

Jim

Nothing done yet, Just arrived at the site recently, but the following banks etc will be hearing from me

Nationwide acc 1

Nationwide acc 2

Nationwide acc 3

My MBNA

Wifes MBNA

My Citibank

Wifes Citibank

My GE Money

Wife's GE Money - £78.85 - Preliminary letter sent 5/6/06

Mint - £140.00 - Preliminary letter sent 5/6/06

Capital One

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve sent my letter to the bank,”Bank of Ireland” asking for my bank charge details for the last 6 years. I got a quick reply, with a list of 14 “£14.50 Referral Fee’s”, the last one was dated 11th Dec 06. I know for sure that there have been more charges taken from my account since Christmas. There were no charges from 07. So I have drafted a letter, which i'm going to post tomorrow. Basically saying that the list was incomplete and that the 40 days is still running at by not supplying me with a complete list of charges for the last 6 year, they were not Complying with the Data Protection Act.

 

I have a couple of questions concerning the above

 

  • Am I correct in what I’m doing
  • Will this judgment diminish my chances of claiming these Fee’s back
  • Will I be better changing my address to and English address and pursue the matter there?
  • Should my fee’s I asked for Include the fees for this year 2007.

All help will be very much appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

This is also my first post but I'm currently torturing the Ulster Bank for mostly irregular account fees of £12-15 over a 3 year period, will this affect my claim as Im about to claim on line when the deadline runs out in 7 days. Would love some advice and support at this time Im claiming £2200 including interest...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone,

 

Just got CAG newsletter and was shocked to read about this claim and the NI court service. I am currently chasing ShAbbey for just over a grand and my NI court date set for the 2nd of May.

 

So April will be interesting month :) but just in case ShAbbey turns nasty I have opened another account elsewhere.

 

I wish you all well with your claims.

 

Rgds,

Insp C.

Abbey - £1100 - Court 18/05/07 - Won in Full 12/05/07

First Direct - Next (pending as 6+ years)

MBNA - PPI charges - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Started 10/05/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, I have successfully challenged the banks for unfair bank charges and have been successful.The only problem now is the banks are trying to reclaim there money back by asking me to pay my overdraft back in full.giving me just one day to repay them and then taking me to court which they have just done. I now have 7 days to respond to the judgment and ask the court if I can pay so much per month until I have cleared my debt I don't a C.C.J.

As I am unemployed at present it is going to take sometime to repay I think they are well within the law what they are doing.

So be aware

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, I have successfully challenged the banks for unfair bank charges and have been successful.The only problem now is the banks are trying to reclaim there money back by asking me to pay my overdraft back in full.giving me just one day to repay them and then taking me to court which they have just done. I now have 7 days to respond to the judgment and ask the court if I can pay so much per month until I have cleared my debt I don't a C.C.J.

As I am unemployed at present it is going to take sometime to repay I think they are well within the law what they are doing.

So be aware

 

Thats rubbish. Which bank?

Link to post
Share on other sites

this is VERY important to people claiming in NI against CITI

 

1.elements of the NI judiciary have got it into their heads that £12 is fair and "recommended by the OFT ".This seems to be blithely accepted as gospel,despite the OFT report stating otherwise

 

2.Citi DO NOT have to give you prior notice of evidence they shall be depending upon in court

 

3.A judge is FULLY ENTITLED to accept "secret evidence" given in the form of undisclosed documents,and to accept the validity thereof without

 

any further investigation.

 

 

3.Points of law appealed using the Human Rights Legislation and Statute regarding overriding objective do not amount to anything in civil cases.

 

4.It may be prudent for anyone contemplating action against CITI in NI to either file an action via the English Courts using anyone whom you know who lives there and who will allow you to use their address for paperwork from the court,asking for full disclosure of how their charges are made up,or else take the ex gratia payment and leave it at that.

 

 

Learn from experience,take it on board and change tack.

 

SURELY THIS CASE HAS NOW BECOME CASE LAW IN THE UK

8)

Link to post
Share on other sites

small claims court does not set case law precedent,and courts in the UK have already dismissed citi attempts to use this case as irrelevant....

 

Your point about secret evidence intriges me, I have a case against the bank and I have to submit documents in discovery prior to the case being listed in the high court. The bank have to do the same any documents not disclosed this way cannot be used in evidence?:-?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i had a case in the small claims court in craigavon this week. we were told at the opening of the court that we must exchange documents we would rely on at that point. the documents did not have to be produced days before the case. essentially you would have only a few minutes to look at any documents that become available at that time.

 

she suggested that we should all try to settle without her ruling and sent us all out to try to resolve our disagreements. most cases don't make it to trial.

 

she was right only 1 case went to trial. mine ( not a bank ). just like judge judy, a bit nervous to begin but once things get going it is surprisingly straghtforward.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK

ready to do moneyclaim on line... Ive passed my own deadline though as I was hospitalized following a car accident, will this matter? Also, they have only sent a reply to my first letter, not the second, should I wait a further time for them to answer? I'm also quite disabled following the accident for the next few months and a bit worried about attending court, can I take in a representative as I'm drugged to the hilt most of teh time?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Just for the record, i can recommend one judge who i get the impression from, 'doesn't take to kindly to the banks.'

 

Its in N.Ireland, so if you wanna travel to a judge on your side, pm me.

 

Put it like this, i appeared in court today, with citi. There evidence was written by their account stating it cost £12.88 per default using the ofts method of charging but £27 odd using their own method of cakculation.

 

The judge asked citi, 'do you have your expert witnesses here today?'

 

of course not!

 

If you want me to rule on this i will require, expert witnesses etc etc.

 

Citi solicitor then said we are arguing a point of law.

 

Judge then again asked for witnesses..

 

CITI solicitor then met me outside to try to settle. Suspect a cheque will soon be on its way..

Charges claim nearly sorted, now taking on anything thats left..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys,

 

Just found this thread, it's a bit dissapointing for me as I have (as I thought) a biggish claim( or two) going in against these guys. I do however have a question about it that might save the day for me. My account(s) have been passed off to Cabot. They tell me that they now own the debt, are they likely to defend against this in the same way that Citi would?

 

Any Ideas

 

Thanks

 

Jim

 

Sorry I am unable to make comment on the Northern Ireland Judgement in itself, however the fact that the debt has been passed to a third party agent makes no difference to the fact that bank charges may be in part unlawful. Having dealt with this lesser publicised anomaly for some time, I would suggest that you send a subject access request to the original creditor and advise Cabot of your intention to dispute the ammount pursued. Remember that the original creditor has an oblgation to respond to your request within the forty day period and under OFT rules relating to debt collection practices the collection agent has an obligation to fully investigate reasonably disputed accounts.

 

One you receive the requested information lodge the counter claim to the original creditor.

 

In some cases involving third party agents, I have found the counter claim to be greater than the ammount being pursued by the debt collection agent.

 

If Cabot continue to pursue you throughout the course of this process you should lodge a complaint to the OFT.

 

Ps debt collectors don't like this procedure as it makes their brain hurt.

 

Good Luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...