Gizmo111 V Citicards**PAID AFTER BALIFFS VISIT**

[gizmo111]

Basically means exactly as it says.

The Judge has ordered Citi to disclose full details of their charging regime and that means their actual costs.

 

Come on Giz...where are you ??????

 

I will write this up properly , but basically they have to disclose their costs to me - not a generic calculation.

 

 

Thanks Martin!

 

Do you think this have any effect on my court date against them in 13 days?

 

Possible they may not wantthe same thing happening again - but prob not.

 

Great news should they finally be forced to disclose true costs!

 

They had to disclose costs in Mercantile Court bit did not - doubt they will now but guess they will settle rather than return to court.

[MARTIN3030]

Its a pretty much foregone conclusion,since the first bank to go on to defend and LOSE will have real implications for the lot of them.

As more media attention is focussed on this (its been on most news channels all day )....more and more people are claiming...couple this with the FOS and the OFT already looking at the banks....probably explains why many of them are now of the realisation that they cannot win and are bypassing the additional legal and interest charges.No greater evidence of that is RBS/Natwest who have been settling new claims in a matter of days without a look in for Cobbetts.

Citi of course have been spurred into the lengthly fight by the American owners who apparantly remain furious about the whole thing and are not used to being taken on by the small people.

There does remain the question over their alleged 12.00 odd costs.....one of the problems it seems is that to clearly illustrate the figures presumably this would involve revealing other figures to prove it,and Judges have admitted they are illiterate on deep financial matters,a claimant without good financial knowledge could too be blinded by their figures.Whatever the true costs are its quite understandable that they would not want to be revealing them to individuals the banks after all are rivals in business.

Theres not many more suprises to come from Brians brigade we have seen them all.......and the courts thankfully have seen THROUGH them all.....

[Empire Strikes Back]

Any news from Citi yet? They were given 14 days to reveal their true costs to me by the Judge on Monday, as you are a couple of days ahead of me, would be interesting to see how they deal with you.

[Enron]

Empire, have you received your order yet? Think Gizmo is waiting on hers.

 

The 14/28 days repsectively starts from the date of issue on the said order.

 

Personally I think that Citi will either default on the order or settle beforehand, as to disclose their figures would leave them open to proper scrutiny.

[gizmo111]

Any news from Citi yet? They were given 14 days to reveal their true costs to me by the Judge on Monday, as you are a couple of days ahead of me, would be interesting to see how they deal with you.

 

 

No nothing yet - although the 14 days will start from the date on the order which could be a few days after the hearing.

[Empire Strikes Back]

No not received anything yet, rang the court today and they said it usually takes about a week for the order to be sent out

[pj41]

Hi All,

 

Dont take this the wrong way!!!!!!!!!!

 

But: The legal system is funded by the haves and it will take as long as it takes. ((we have to wait for the system the court takes a week to process etc, we have PAID them to process it!!!!!!) Just do it NOW)

 

However, If the shoe was on he other foot they would have the baliffs in by now.

 

Just my opinion.

 

We'll get the refund.

 

 

Cheers

 

pj

[anney63]

Hi

New to Citi thread I am reclaiming charges and acting for a friend before I really get into this (4 different cards in all) I like to think ahead can I act on his behalf as a lay person he just wouldn't be any good in court at all

Anney

[Karma!]

I'm right at the beginning with my claim against Citi ... just received the

 

"In over a dozen court cases involving Citi, we have successfully argued the fairness of the above policy and the fairness of the £12 charges. The cases have all resulted in the claims being dismissed and the courts have implicity held that the policy is fair and the charges reasonable, being in line with both the OFT guidance and common law principles of damage for breach of contract. I understand this is not the outcome you hoped for ... bla ... bla..."

 

Can't wait to see the outcome of this thread ... especially their disclosure on 'true costs'. Ten out of Ten for tenacity to you all!

[gizmo111]

I'm right at the beginning with my claim against Citi ... just received the

 

"In over a dozen court cases involving Citi, we have successfully argued the fairness of the above policy and the fairness of the £12 charges. The cases have all resulted in the claims being dismissed and the courts have implicity held that the policy is fair and the charges reasonable, being in line with both the OFT guidance and common law principles of damage for breach of contract. I understand this is not the outcome you hoped for ... bla ... bla..."

 

Can't wait to see the outcome of this thread ... especially their disclosure on 'true costs'. Ten out of Ten for tenacity to you all!

 

Thanks Karma - continue your claim as normal - and let us know if you need any help.

[Karma!]

By the way Gizmo do you know anything about their statement? Is it true? Over a dozen or so dismissed cases?

[gizmo111]

By the way Gizmo do you know anything about their statement? Is it true? Over a dozen or so dismissed cases?

 

It is kind of true - I know of 2 that have been dismissed - but that doesn't mean lost. What has happened is that Citi have paid the difference between the £25 and £12, and submitted their costs as £12.88 and the judges have beleived them. They did the same on mine but I successfully got full disclosure to see how they got to the magical £12.88;)

[acestealer]

God, i really need to make sure i get full disclosure as well if i'm one of the test cases.

[Milo19]

any news Giz?

[gizmo111]

any news Giz?

 

I have the order and final hearing is 22/05.

 

Upon hearing both parties in person /Or

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. By 30th March 2007 the Defendant do Disclose to the Claimant and the Court.

i) Evidence ot its pre-estimates prepared during the period the Claimant held its account with the Defendant from 5.1.02

until 8.10.03.

ii) Its costs in relation to the Administration of breaches of contract by the Claimant during this period.

iii) Fully certified breakdown of the actual expenditure incurred by the Claimant in relation to each of the charges

detailed in the Claim.

iv) Where the charge is purely an administration charge fee applied under the Terms & Conditions of the account, the

Defendant shall provide details of how it was set and the calculations implied to set it.

v) Copies of all correspondence with Hillesden Securites LTD relating to this account.

2. Copies of any further Legal Arguments relied on or skeleton argument be filed and served by 30 March 2007.

3. List for final Hearing First open date after 35 days with a time estimate of 2 hours. Dated 22 February 2007

[Greendeco]

Gizmo

my claim not acknowledged and they had up to yesterday not sure now whether to file that the defendant has not acknowledged my claim or give them another chance as per the faqs? What do you suggest?

[gizmo111]

Gizmo

my claim not acknowledged and they had up to yesterday not sure now whether to file that the defendant has not acknowledged my claim or give them another chance as per the faqs? What do you suggest?

 

Personally I would give them more time, as if you get judgement they will apply for and most likely get a set aside, and this will just delay your claim further. If they haven't acknowledged by Weds let me know and I will sort a response out for you.

[Greendeco]

cheers Giz, it wouldn't let me do the judgement anyway so perhaps they have acknowledged and I just don't know yet!

[elsinore]

I have the order and final hearing is 22/05.

 

Upon hearing both parties in person /Or

IT IS ORDERED THAT

1. By 30th March 2007 the Defendant do Disclose to the Claimant and the Court.

i) Evidence ot its pre-estimates prepared during the period the Claimant held its account with the Defendant from 5.1.02

until 8.10.03.

ii) Its costs in relation to the Administration of breaches of contract by the Claimant during this period.

iii) Fully certified breakdown of the actual expenditure incurred by the Claimant in relation to each of the charges

detailed in the Claim.

iv) Where the charge is purely an administration charge fee applied under the Terms & Conditions of the account, the

Defendant shall provide details of how it was set and the calculations implied to set it.

v) Copies of all correspondence with Hillesden Securites LTD relating to this account.

2. Copies of any further Legal Arguments relied on or skeleton argument be filed and served by 30 March 2007.

3. List for final Hearing First open date after 35 days with a time estimate of 2 hours. Dated 22 February 2007

 

Makes very nice reading Gizmo. I hope I get the same!

 

Els

[noomill060]

"What poor education I have received has been gained in the University of Life."

...but it was called the Polytechnic of Life back then, wasnt it...?

[gizmo111]

"What poor education I have received has been gained in the University of Life."

 

...but it was called the Polytechnic of Life back then, wasnt it...?

 

Sending an idiot to University does not make a wise man - it justs turns him into an educated idiot.

[noomill060]

Indeed, and these days, an educated idiot who is about to serve papers on the Student Loan Company....

[elsinore]

 

...but it was called the Polytechnic of Life back then, wasnt it...?

 

Lol, now then you young whippersnapper, when I was a lad, polytechnics hadn't even been invented! A crayon and slate for a copybook and an abacus for a computer!

 

Els

[noomill060]

[elsinore]

:-?