MKAndy Vs Citicards

[mkandy]

This case is still ongoing everyone, i'm still trying to reach a settle agreement with Citi's solictors. I doubt it's going to get anywhere though!

[tiglet]

Hi enron, slightly off topic, but why is Egg an exception?

[Enron]

Can't remember specifically why, but they were an exception - from memory they ask for proof of income or something along those lines.

 

As such they are an exception to the £12 rule, and can charge £16 which is reflected in their current charging regime.

 

However this is certainly to be a highly inflated figure when the likes of "Late Payment" and "Over The Limit" penalty charges are entirely automated, as such are challengable under contract law.

[mkandy]

My claim is still ongoing!

 

I'm getting sick and tired in having to reiterate why i require default removal to both Citi and Sheds, they keep stating they 'feel' it's correct!

[Enron]

They are just quoting what they officially have been told to.

 

Despite being inaccurate and thus unlawfully recorded they are going to act as if they're penalty charges are perfectly legal

[wednesday1867]

Andy how far are you from court action or a court date?

[mkandy]

Not really sure to be honest, i'm currently in fairly decent negotiation with Eversheds, but it all depends on the flexibility of Citi.

[wednesday1867]

So maybe no need for court then? Wonder if i should try negotiating

 

Good luck with it

[Enron]

Depends on what they are willing to offer.

 

If they are wiling to justify their charges fair enough, but then again hell might freeze over at the same time.

 

In the absence of any justification, then the materials we have so far should help.

[mkandy]

I think we all know, money is never going to be the issue with Bank like Citi, it's the removal of defaults they cannot accept, even with the facts stacked in my favour they are still claiming it is correctly recorded.

 

The deletion of manual intervention is making things even more difficult though.

[Enron]

If you have any charges after they deleted their records, they should be able to supply the manual intervention information you require.

 

Though some banks are a bit more savey, got a complaint lodged with the ICO against the RBS as they are not playing ball on supplying manual intervention information.

 

Failing that I can demonstrate through my m.i. sheets that "late payments" are fully automated, and dont think they can argue that practice would be different from customer to customer. If they are not supplying you sheets that cover your account after you have complained then that is adequate reason to include my materials in your bundle.

[mkandy]

I deliberately chose not to update this thread as i was going through settlement discussion with Eversheds. However, today i've recieved an unsatisfactory ultimatum, and i've been backed into a corner.

 

Citicards have now drafted a cheque for the full amount of charges, and are still refusing to remove the default notice from my credit files, stating they still feel this is correctly applied. In pointing out their inaccuracies i recieved a response stating that they have completed their obligations from the courts, that is, to return the default fees, and that is true, the court enforcement merely tackled the financial side, not the default issue.

 

In phoning the court they have informed me they only can enforce CCJ removal as they're the only markers they apply, and defaults have to be taken up with the company in question.

 

Default removal was in every letter, in my particulars of claim but was omitted by the courts for the reasons above. So, now i'm really after advice as to whether it's still possible to get this damned default removed.

[Enron]

Hi, depends on your POC and whether default removal was part of the judgement.

 

If a default was inaccurately recorded as in the amount included penalty charges you should have been able to remove it under the Data Protection Act.

 

I would suggest having a word with Martin3030

[MARTIN3030]

Yes I can see whats happened.I was told that I had to address the default issues with my main claim.

What I did was claim under the data protection act.It involved having to send a S10 notice.In this scenario if Citi made me a settlement then I would class it as partial settlement-it would still leave the door open for continuing.

In your particulars of claim did you rely on any statutes for the default removal ?

I have another exacting claim with RBS - again with data protection issues,RBS were willing to remove the default but were not happy to pay Compensation-In my claim I cited an unknown amount less than 5K to keep it in small claims.RBS withdrew their offer to remove it as soon as the stays began to hit.They managed to get a stay but I am contemplating applying to get the stay lifted arguing with a request that the Data protection issues be heard seperately.They may challenge this but it cant be on the grounds of the unlawfulness of charges being determined since its nothing to do with continuing to process data after the terms and conditions ended and permission was withdrawn.

We are still testing the waters regarding the CRAs entries and looking at how they are responding to our questions.

The difficulty seems to me that all 3 of them know-If one moves to address things as they legally should do-then the other 2 will have to follow.

I think its the case that THEY are watching things and trying to find ways around things just as much as US.

 

It seems in MKAndy that your Pocs did not allow the Court scope to remove.I cannot think of a way forward other than to Accept the settlement but make clear to Citi that you will pursue the other issues in another claim....in any case if this was not a matter dealt with under the current claim then it makes no difference-Citi could not contest it.

 

If the amount of the refund is the same as the default you can take it up with the CRA - The OFT already ruled on the unfairness of CC charges so they cant say they will await the OFT hand down.

First you need to serve Citi with a S10- then ask the CRA to remove it.

They will respond that they need authority from Citi - and here then you can use the data protection act.

Edited September 5, 2008 by MARTIN3030

[mkandy]

Hi Martin - I've just messaged you apologies for the duplication.

Having referred to my POC it simply states "Removal of the Default Notice applied to the claimants credit file." under the section 'the claimant claims'. There is no statutes referring to the default removal throughout the POC.

Does this omission mean that a claim for default removal is largely going to be fruitless now?

[Enron]

Think you'll have to look towards going for the default removal in a seperate claim, though I defer to Marin on this as he is more knowledgable.

[MARTIN3030]

Ah yes now I see-so it wasnt from a CCJ ?

In this case its the CRA who have to remove it (or Citi)

So yes the only way you can do it is via the data protection act route.

As the Court rightly say-its a marker.

[mkandy]

Ok cool. I'll just cash the cheque when it turns up then.

 

My only concern now though, if Citi are settling with no admission of liability. If i go down the Data Protection Act route is it a similar claim, i.e claiming their fees are not proportionate of their cost, but rather than claiming money (as i would have already claimed it) i would be asking for default removal due to inaccuracy?

[wednesday1867]

Least your getting somewhere with at least managing to get a full refund Andy.

 

I have a question about the Default Removal in the POC's, Andy on my thread you suggested adding something in about the Data Protection Act, which i did, did you not? Or if you did, what did you put?

 

Im just wondering, cos im on the same path as Andy, reclaiming charges and Default removal, on my POC's, i put this down for the default

 

As the recorded default amount is solely made up of unlawful charges, the recorded amount is inacurate. So, the default needs to be removed in accordance with Section 14 of the Data Protection Act 1999.

 

So my question is, if i win, do Citi have to remove the Default as well as refund me or can they just refund me and leave the default on my file?

 

Thanks

[mkandy]

Wednesday, I did reference the default in my POC, but put no statutes to back up why default removal should be a part of my claim, aka breach of the data protection act. Obviously i should have done, but at the time i didn't realise the intricacies of doing so, as i actually filed the claim a long time ago now.

 

A word of warning though. If Citi follow the same process with you as they did with me, it will no doubt go along these lines:

 

• They may not receive the N1 form
  
• They then may not receive default judgement enforcement from the court
  
• You should probably send a copy by recorded delivery, at which point you may get a response from them, along the lines of "We will win in court, so cancel your claim or you will be liable for costs"
  
• You will then have to enter into reasonable settlement negotiation
  

 

The key in this whole process though is what exactly the Court is enforcing in the default judgement. If it's only money, then Citi only have to give you money.

 

For me, this isn't the end. I'm going to try to get this default removed as it's unsubstantiated, incorrect and, in my opinion, in breach of the data protection act. I already have a complaint open with the ICO, and they agree in principal that the default is incorrect. Time will tell.

[mkandy]

Well, the cheque has cleared, so now it's on to round 2!

[Enron]

I would suggest first of all sending an s.10 notice pursuant to the Data Protection Act 1998, which means they should finish processing data including the default to the CRAs.

 

They obviously wont take any notice of it, but legally your permission is then withdrew.

[mkandy]

S10 Drafted! In the post tomorrow!

[mkandy]

Just in need of some clarification dudes.

 

Section 10 has been served, recorded delivery and I have received confirmation that this has signed for by Citi. I'm pretty sure that Citi will do nothing, but anyway, I have contacted Experian informing them that I have withdrawn Citi's right to process my data.

 

What will happen now? Will Experian just ask Citi their opinion which will then no doubt say they want to continue to record defamatory information against me, and leave it at that? If this is the case, what is next?

[Enron]

Equifax were fairly reasonable when I contact them to inform them that Citi had no authorisation to record data against me.

 

Call Credit and Experian are another matter, they will basically do whatever Citi tell them - after all Citi pay them to record data against you.... currently battling with Citi who have no paperwork relating to the account completed by myself, but continue to request payment on an alleged debt and have recorded a default against me without sending a notice.