CitiCard (merged)

Twinkly

servalan wrote: »

can someone point me in the dirrection of the citi financil thread can't find it . Go their standard letter back saying the charges are just and will satand now cant find any info to take it further with this bank.

Thanks

Cant find a citifinancial dedicated thread without lots of searching which you could just as easily do yourself really. Did find, after a cursory search, a thread for credit cards and store cards that may help to flick through for possible answers:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=305961

In answer to this post, the letter you have had though is pretty much standard for all banks and credit cards to send as an initial fob off. My advice is to follow the procedure and send the 2nd letter this time requesting interest and take it from there.

cloth_ears_2

servalan wrote: »

can someone point me in the dirrection of the citi financil thread can't find it . Go their standard letter back saying the charges are just and will satand now cant find any info to take it further with this bank.

Thanks

Thread is under CitiCards HELP
its on the first page of threads at moment
Don't know how to link you to it sorry

gizmo111

malcindebt wrote: »

Citicard have NOT sucessfully defended half a dozen claims- there is one claim in Northern Ireland (Where the law is slightly different), where they used underhand tactics to claim their charges are actualy £12.88, and so were only asked to repay the difference. This case is currently under appeal.

Do not let them bully you, GO FOR IT.

I suggest all Citi cards claimants read here and absolutely understand the tactics that Citi use.
You will end up in a long battle and you are likely to end up in court with these, if you follow the correct researched, tried and tested advice on CAG you will be in a position to win.
The NI case is now concluded.

Spinxy

in citi cards defence they have asked me to proof the following:
(as written in the defence form)
1. that the case of wilson v love is a persuasive precedent, and puts the claimant to proof of this by specific application of the reference to the case law relied upon and/or the exactcitation of the relevant parts of the sections of laws and regulations relied upon.
2. the defendant avers that the claimant interest calculation is not applicable to this action or, if it is applicable, that it is wrong and the defendant puts the claimant to proof that the interest is owed.

it also states the amoutns i'm claiming and the dates are wrong (i will double check the statements and copy the relivant ones as proof)

in one part of the form they have ticked (i dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form)

then in the statement they have contradicted themselves by saying the defendant has made an ex gratia refund of the claimant of 236 which is the difference between the OFT £12 and the original default charge!!!

my claim was for £440+interest the approx £50 court fees, i would still like to go for the full amount. do you think this is wise or should i stop here
please advise either way!!

Cheers

Twinkly

Spinxy wrote: »

in citi cards defence they have asked me to proof the following:
(as written in the defence form)
1. that the case of wilson v love is a persuasive precedent, and puts the claimant to proof of this by specific application of the reference to the case law relied upon and/or the exactcitation of the relevant parts of the sections of laws and regulations relied upon.
2. the defendant avers that the claimant interest calculation is not applicable to this action or, if it is applicable, that it is wrong and the defendant puts the claimant to proof that the interest is owed.

it also states the amoutns i'm claiming and the dates are wrong (i will double check the statements and copy the relivant ones as proof)

in one part of the form they have ticked (i dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form)

then in the statement they have contradicted themselves by saying the defendant has made an ex gratia refund of the claimant of 236 which is the difference between the OFT £12 and the original default charge!!!

my claim was for £440+interest the approx £50 court fees, i would still like to go for the full amount. do you think this is wise or should i stop here
please advise either way!!

Cheers

The case of Wilson V Love (1896) established that:

a charge was a penalty if it did not relate to the true cost of an item.

A tenant farmer agreed to pay an additional rent of £3 per ton by way of penalty for every ton of hay or straw that he sold off the premises during the last 12 months of the tenancy. The clause was regarded as a penalty because at the time hay was worth five shillings a ton more than straw.

I should think that this is pretty much all you will need to state in defence and answer to their demand of proof. Someone else may be able to advise further so please get a second opinion.

Double check all your figures and that you have charged 8% interest per charge applicable by date using the calculator on the main article here :

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/cgi-bin/viewnews.cgi?newsid1141050760,24632,

Copies of the relevant statements as proof is a good idea yes. Ensure your full amount claimed does not include the refund already made.

If you are confident you have not made any mistakes in your calculations then base your choice on that, not their defence - it is designed to cause you to falter. Good luck

Spinxy

cheers thats pretty much what i was expecting to hear.
it was the moneysavingexpert for that i used to work out the interest, so i'm pretty confident my figures are correct, although i will double check dates and amounts!!! strangly they have pointed out that i'm asking for less than the total amount of default charges, so i may have missed one!!
i'll fill in the MCOL and return it without my extra information, if it get's to court i'll go prepared with these then!!!

cheers

hibees1875_2

thanks gizmo, have checked out your thread, and others. have given me hope and courage to fight on... as well as a few laughs along the way. POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!!

Ps. i know you prob dont want to post specifics, but was anything decided about an action plan of contacting papers etc as you alluded to on CAG forum?

hibees1875_2

I received a rathe rcurious letter today reporting to be from citicards chief exec office in salford. Basically, stating they are looking into my "complaint" and advise me that it could take them upto 6weeks to retrieve my statements for them to have a look at, unless i have already requested them under DPA - which i have.
I'm not sure as to how to take this letter. I'm thinking its a grandiose stalling tactic. However, is it possible they could make me an offer i cant refuse? All I can do is stick to my schedule and if they dont reposnd to the timeframe take them to court. Just wondered if anyne else had a similar letteR?

Leaf

Sorry this is not a bank charges thread but I've looked and looked on other threads.

I sent off for statements from all my cards (now chopped up!) and sent the £10. Citi banked it almost immediately, the others have not. My concern is that not only have Citi made unlawfull charges on the account, won one of the only cases I know of they have also nicked another tenner from me. I have not received the statements requested on 24th March.
Any experiences anyone wants to share?

Cheers
Leaf

hibees1875_2

if you only requested on 24th march 2007 then you have another month to wait for statements, but you will get the citibak/citicard ones sent recorded delivery. capital one dealt with my claim very quickly and i was happy with the outcome. try the consumer action group for some good info on citicard. makes for interesting reading and more people get payouts than not so dont be disheartened at the first hurdle. You have to be in it for the long game otherwise it's not for you and you wont get what you want out of it. Personally, i didnt send cheques for DPA info, i sent postal orders, still trackable but bankable immediately, therefore no excuses for delay.