Groovycaz v Citicards Citi set aside next week

[groovycaz]

HELP

just had a thought, if citi dont file any papers into court and just turn up on the day, what do I need to do about court bundle, ive already sent citi and court the information as of the draft directions which included, schedule of charges, copy of statements showing charges, a statement of evidence and OFT statement, DunlopPneumatic Tyre Co v New Garage and Motor Co ltd, UTCCR, Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982, Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and other relevant case laws to penalty charges, but what about the rest, how many court bundles do I do? and do i need to send anything else to the court or citi before I go to court on the 8th, god! ive just got this mad panic on...GC

[groovycaz]

OK panic over, ive just found BankFodder's Going To Court posting so now know what im doing, phew ah ha nearly had a panic attack Ice..GC

[gizmo111]

What have you received from Court since the set aside hearing?

Did the court make a full disclosure order?

[groovycaz]

Hi Gizmo, yes the court stated rhat the draft directions apply which are for full disclosure, today I recieved from citi their papers which they intend to rely on in court which are,

WHITNESS STATEMENT

1 I, John alan Jones, make this statement in response to the claimants claim.

2 i am the finance director of the defendant and work at 1 exchange quay salford manchester M5 3EA

3 i am aware of the OFT's report referred to in the skelton argument of Briam Smith and the numerous claims that have been issued against the entire banking industry as a result of the OFT's findings that the then existing level of charges levied on defaulting customers was unfair.

4 As a direct result of that report and the threat of regulatory action by the OFT, I understand the majority of the UK's financial institutions have reduced their default charges. the majority have elected to adopt the level of £12 which was refered to in the report but two, CO-OP and Egg have introduced charges of £11 and £15 resectively.

5 Attached to this statement as 'Exhibit 1' is a copy of the OFT report "Calculating fair default charges in credit card contracts". The Court is refered to sections 3.14-3.15, 3.26-3.27 and 5.8 far an understanding of the OFT's position in relation to how it believes bank charges should be calculated.

6 Attached as "Exhibit 2" is set out the basis of the defendant's calculation of the costs to the defendant of the collections infastructure based upon the factors which the OFT allowed the banks to incorporate into their calculations of such charges.

7 the defendand has included within its calculation of costs attributable to the failure of a customer to pay in line with the terms of the consumer credit agreement those costs attributable to maintaining a collections infastructure including; systems and staff supporting the process; communications costs for both mail and telephone activity; credit and risk policy staff; management; and facilities costs.

8 Prior to the recent guidance from the OFT regarding the correct accounting methodology for the calculation of charges, the defendant adopted as the basis of its default fee charges a calculation based upon identifying the total monthly cost of the business of all collections-related services and these costs were then apportioned to the number of fees levied and actually paid by customers. Using tha mothodology, the defendant's actual default fees per breach of contract were calculated as £27.42 although the defendant only charged £25.

9 The OFT invited submissions from eight leading credit card suppliers. citi was not invited to participate. Citi does not agree with the OFT's conclusions on permitted costs of breach nor the conclusion of uncollected fees in the denominator used to calculate the same and responded to the OFT as such. However a commercial decision was taken to accept the £12 fee going forwards despite our calculations showing the true cost using the perscribed OFT methodology being £13.47.

10 This does represent a genuine pre-estimate of the defendants losses per breach of contract by customers and is in-line with the factors and methodology which its regulatory body the OFT, has stated to be fair and reasonable.

11 With due respsct to the Claimant he offers no alternative analysis of the correct level of charges which the credit industry should charge. Without an alternative the defendant believes the OFT, which has had the benefit of the confidential submissions of the credit card industry into their costs, is well placed to put a reasonable therefore genuine pre-estimate on their costs which it has done at £12.

12 The OFT report acknowledges that default fees are not, per se, unfair and allowes that costs of up to £12 are recoverable to pay for such infastructure.

13 The defendants own costs are higher but for the reasons set out, it has adopted the lower fee. the defendant has at all times acted within the law and within the obligations imposed upon it by its regulator and continues to do so.

 

The theres a 25 point skelton argument, point 6 stating

The Claimant claims that the defendant is in breach of contract by dint of the application of penalty charges to the account. she does not state why she believes these to be penalties in her claim form but merely parrots a line of argument downloaded from one of several consumer action web sites which have been orchestrating these default fee claims as agent provocateurs. she seeks to recover all such sums and interest thereon, as if it was a debt.

 

Well what do you think of that!!! is this the usual...GC

[groovycaz]

its exactly the same skelton argument as mymoney..GC

[groovycaz]

Hi all

had a look through all the paperwork from citi and they have not complied with the draft directions as they have not submitted any true costs of breaches, any evidence relating of proof of costs, just realy going on about the OFTs report and how they agreed to £12, they also came up with costs of £13.47 and also said that it costs them £27.42 and that they only charged me £25;) ..maybe they made a mistake..GC

[icepop55]

OK panic over, ive just found BankFodder's Going To Court posting so now know what im doing, phew ah ha nearly had a panic attack Ice..GC

 

 

Hi Gc

 

Was this a reference?

[groovycaz]

Hi Ice

This was something I printed off in Feb when I was thinking about other claims, im not sure how to link it but the http:/www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/guidance-notes/641-case-guidance-notes

if you want to have a look its just telling the court proccess and what to do, hope this helps..Gc

[groovycaz]

Enron

Thanks Very Much..gc

[groovycaz]

Hi all

Court date tomorrow, got my act together, my papers duly marked and in order, will let you know the outcome tomorrow afternoon;) ..Thanks Gizmo and special thanks to Enron,..GC

[gizmo111]

Hi all

Court date tomorrow, got my act together, my papers duly marked and in order, will let you know the outcome tomorrow afternoon;) ..Thanks Gizmo and special thanks to Enron,..GC

 

Good Luck

[groovycaz]

Hi all,

Got to court and Citi were represented by an agency solicitor "Mrs Dawson" very nice lady, The Judge briefly went through my claim and the defence then stated that in view of the forthcoming ruling by the OFT all claims of this nature were to be stayed, I asked if the hearing could go ahead today as the current OFTs case was related to overdraft charges on current accounts and did not affect credit card accounts, I pointed out that Citi had failed to comply with the draft order to fully disclose true costs and that they had 2 costings in the same year of £12.88 and £13.47, however although he sympathised with my wanting to bring about a conclusion today, the general consensus regarding penalty charge claims was, that all claims of this nature were to be stayed for 4 months, at the end of 4 months if no conclusion he would be looking to extend until the OFTs ruling, I tried but he was having none of it, his mind was already made up before we went in:( ..GC

Could one of the mods change my thread to STAYED UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. thanks

[Enron]

That's a shame, and to be honest I am surprised.

 

The OFT court case against 7 banks and 1 building society relates purely to overdraft charges on bank current accounts - and not credit cards for which there is already an OFT report in place.

 

Regardless of which way any decision goes, a ruling on current account charges should not have any impact on claims for credit card charges.

 

Mine was allowed to proceed because of this very fact.

 

Maybe you were just unlucky and encounterred a judge who was slapping a stay on each and every bank charge case that came his/her way.

[groovycaz]

Hi Enron

His mind was made up before we went into court, no matter what I said he had his mind made up on the stay, its a shame realy as the solicitor for citi had'nt defended a penalty fee case before, I asked her if it was usual practice for claims in relation to default fees charged to credit cards, being stayed while awaiting the OFTs test case ruling and she did'nt know.

Im disappointed my case was'nt heard today, I had a good feeling about it, all week I made notes and had everything in order but never got the chance to put my case across, Il concentrate on my business claim for now then with any luck that will be over and done with when the time comes to resume this claim..thanks for everything, il still be around and good luck to all the rest of the citi claimers...GC

[lemma1968]

I've pm'ed you!

[groovycaz]

Hi lemma,

ive replied, just

[elsinore]

Rotten luck, GC.

I didn't respond before now, because I didn't want it to look like gloating:(

 

Are you allowed to appeal against the stay? If so, you might get it heard by a judge with a different mindset. Just a thought.

 

Els

[groovycaz]

Rotten luck, GC.

I didn't respond before now, because I didn't want it to look like gloating:(

 

Are you allowed to appeal against the stay? If so, you might get it heard by a judge with a different mindset. Just a thought.

 

Els

 

Elsinore, you would'nt do that, would you! only kidding:D it was just the luck of the day, im very happy for any citi reclaimers whove been refunded, and hope there's many more, i think other claimers should be aware that citi could be writing to the courts requesting stays, ive a sneaky feeling thats this is what happened in my case, maybe i hould ask the question..Gc

[groovycaz]

Oh forgot to add,

Citi only sent me a letter today, containing promotional cheques, bloody cheek, straight in the shredder..Gc

[Enron]

It might be an idea to contact the court to request whether the defendant has sent any correspondence to the court recently.

[groovycaz]

I thought of that Enron, we all know what depths citi would sink to , so they can keep our money, because the OFT have already ruled on credit card fees, even after the OFTs test case on bank accounts, it should'nt make the slightest bit of difference to my calim, cant citi see that in the long run they will have to pay me more money back in interest, and DAMAGES ha ha ...Gc

[Enron]

Think that they want to make the process as unpleasant for people as possible to put any other claimants off.

 

However some of us have become quite seasoned, and know all their weak points - why produce 2 different cost pre-estimates, and why be so reluctant to produce a breakdown of costs if your figures are correct....

[groovycaz]

Hi all

called the court office today to enquire if citi had sent in any correspondence requesting that my claim be stayed, was told that all the DJs had been notified from "above" that all penalty claims were to be stayed while awaiting the outcome of the OFTs findings...Gc

[Enron]

That's interesting.... sounds as the courts may have been improperly notified as this should only relate to Current Accounts.

 

Contact the person who said about passing your details onto Martin Lewis, and inform them of this.

[groovycaz]

Hi Enron, ive recieved email from their office and informed them that the courts are recieving the wrong information regarding cases being stayed, which relate solely to credit card claims, ive told them which court I was at and think its something they are looking into exposing, Il keep you updated..Gc