Hondamad vs CitiCard (round 2)

[hondamad21]

Hello,

On Thursday I handed in my small claim against citicards. This is the second time that I have launched a claim against citicards. I mistakenly put citicards international instead of citicards Europe. (if you want to read more about my mistake click here)

 

Anyway I am now waiting for the hearing date.

 

Good luck to everyone else who currently have claims outstanding.

 

Hondamad

[craigten]

Hi there, im fairly new to all this but i am currently taking HSBC to court for around £1500 but i am very wary of doing the same with Citi cards as i have read that they are actually contesting the claims?! i have sent the usual 2 letters before court action asking/demanding they pay me the £763 that they have charged me (including interest). I have recieved a letter from a Mark Clibbens saying that "it may take between three and six weeks as they (statements) are retrieved from our archives" blah,blah and that he will confirm in writing the outcome, so what i want to know is do i to to moneyclaim online? Please,please can you/anyone help or advise me? Many thanks-Craig

[gizmo111]

Craig - I have asked you on another thread - please start your own rather than posting the same q on everyone else's

 

Thankyou

[craigten]

Oh im so sorry,im really new at this but very willing to learn!! Please advise as to how to start a thread of my own? Really appreciate your help you know-Craig

[hondamad21]

Hello all,

 

An update to what is happening with my claim.

 

Citi failed to submit a defence for the 10/04 hearing date deadline,

I then submitted form 11 to get a decree against citi.

 

I then go the decree on the 25/04.

 

Sent citi usual letter asking to pay up or will send in the Sheriff Officers.

 

Received letter from citi's senior solicitor Mr D Travis in the 10/05 saying that he has asked Edinburgh Sheriff Court to recall the decree on grounds that they never received details about the pursuers claim!

 

I am going to ask the clerks at the court to see if there is any way I can object to this.

 

Any help or advise in this will be greatly appreciated!!!

 

hondamad

[hondamad21]

Hello again,

 

After reading more threads I stumbled on to a thread by bankfodder for "Wasted Costs order".

I know I may be jumping the gun on this but has anyone who has won against citi claimed for this???

 

Thanks in advance,

 

hondamad

[hondamad21]

Some developments . . .

 

Today my poor old mum got a bit of a fright when two sheriff court officers turned up at the house while I was at work. Seems that Citi wanted to make sure that I get the letter for the decree recall so they used sheriff officer rather then recorded delivery.

 

Have been told the new hearing date is 05-jun

 

 

If anyone can help me with what I need to take along I would be most grateful!!!

 

Starting to get just a little nervous . . .

[hondamad21]

If anyone could give advise on what to expect? What papers to take with my to court? :???:

 

I would be most grateful.

 

hondamad

[elsinore]

Have been told the new hearing date is 05-jun

 

Have you got notification of that date from the court? What type of hearing is it?

 

Els

[hondamad21]

Hi Els,

 

Yes, I phone the clerk at the court who told me 05-Jun at 10.30am.

He said it was very unlikely that it will be a full hearing but come prepared, as it is up to the Sheriff on the day.

 

hondamad

[elsinore]

Sorry Honda, I know nowt about the Scottish system, so you best do as the clerk suggested. The court should confirm the hearing to you in writing and that order may well have directions on it.

 

Els

[hondamad21]

Update . . .

 

well the court date is tomorrow. Getting very nervous now. Especially after reading the from BBC " Judge to strike out bank claims"

BBC NEWS | Business | Judge to strike out bank claims

 

any advise/suggestions would be greatly appreciated!!

Hondamad

[Stornoway]

Good Luck !

[hondamad21]

Right back from court,

 

It seems today was just to discuss the recall of decree which Citi had applied for.

I got to court 30mins early to steady the nerves.

Sat and listed to the other cases before me. Had a few cases heard before me for charges all against Lloyds TSB.

When my case was called the judge just asked the Citi Lawyer questions about why they did not respond to the case when it was served. They stated that they never received the papers! He then asked me if I had anything to add. As Citi have a right to recall the decree once I stated no.

 

I was looking forward to Mr. Smith, however he did not come. Instead I think they have hired a local firm. The layer was pleasant enough, only found out she was representing Citi when my case was called.

 

Now the date has been set for 19-jun to actually hear the arguments.

 

Once again any comments/advise much appreciated. I will clear out my PM box this evening so feel free to PM me

[elsinore]

So, presumably, Citi have now submitted a defence, or have been given time to do so?

 

Els

[hondamad21]

Hi Elsinore,

 

I am not sure. They lawyer herself stated to the judge that all she has been told is to ask for a recall of decree.

 

However I do believe that they will need to submit one before 19-jun.

I am going to get in touch with the Sheriff office and find out later today/tomorrow.

 

Hondamad

[MARTIN3030]

I think Robertx the mod may know a little more on this.

[hondamad21]

Ok receved their defence today. . .

 

Hondamad21 vs. Citi Financial Europe Plc

 

• The defendant is a credit card company . . .
  
• The defender admits that the pursuer had a credit car account with the defender . . .
  
• The Defender avers that the agreement with the pursuer contains terms entitling the Defender to levy fee for late payment exceeding credit limit and returned payments, and avers that the pursuer was aware of and agreed to the same before entering into the agreement.
  
• The defender denies that the same are unenforceable at law, being penalty charges designed to penalise the pursuer for breach of contract and to generate profit for the defender rather then being liquidated damages designed to compensate the defender for the actual loss occurring to the defender as a result of the breach, whether under the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations (1999), the Unfair Contracts Terms Act 1977 or otherwise, and puts the pursuer to proof of this by specific reference to the relevant sections of the statutes and specific citation of case law relied upon.
  
• The defender denies that it unlawfully debited the pursuers account between sept-02 and nov-o4. The defender avers that the Small Claims Summons dose not particularise either the amount of the claim (there is no “attached schedule” to the Small Claims Summons containing these, in spite of what the pursuer states therein) or the dates upon which the amount claimed arose and puts the pursuer to strict proof of the amount of his claim. (There was an attached schedule; I am not sure why they did not get it.)
  
• The defender admit that, between sept-02 and nov-04, the pursuer breached the agreement on no fewer then 28 separate occasions and, accordingly, the sum £570 was debited to the pursuers account by way of late payment, returned payment and overlimit fees (26 fees at £20 and 2 fees at £25), as per the Terms and Conditions of the Agreement.
  
• The purser is claiming as a money claim a sum equivalent to that which he claims was unlawfully debited to his account over the term of the agreement in late payment, returned payment and overlimit fees. The claim is entirely based on the recent OFT statement on the alleged unfairness of such default fees. The OFT stated that the level at which default fees, though not the principle of the default charging itself, was unfair in the contest of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. It also reported that the fees were, in its opinion, a penalty contrary to common law principles of damages for breach of contract.
  
• The defender has agreed to abide by the OFT report and adopt a lower level of default fees which it has set at the new industry standard of £12. Over the lifetime of this account the pursuer has set its default fees at £25 and £20.
  
• The defender has made an ex gratia refund of a sum exceeding the difference between (i) the current default fee of £12 and (ii) the default fee at £25 and £20 incurred by the pursue, which amounts to £234. A cheque for this sum has been sent to the pursuer. (One was sent to me a couple of months ago and I returned it, In the covering letter of this defence Mr Travis avers that he has sent me a cheque of £234, but I did NOT find it enclosed)
  
• The defender avers that the pursuer’s claim is not a money claim but a damages action and further avers that the pursuer’s interest calculation is not applicable to this action or, if it is applicable, that it is wrong and the defender puts the pursuer to proof that the interest is owed.
  
• The defender is currently defending almost 150 similar claims in all three jurisdictions of the United Kingdom. It has successfully defended many of these claims, the most being recent being that of Potter v Citifinancial Europe plc in the Salford County Court this month, for which District judge Hovington gave a full written judgment. Although the defender fully respects the fact that Scotland is an entirely separate jurisdiction to England and Wales, the statutes considered in that case and referred to in pursuer’s claim are equally applicable in Scotland. Accordingly, the defender believes that this case should be of persuasive effect to the Court and encloses a copy of this said judgment for consideration.
  
• Save as otherwise admitted, he claims in the pursuer’s Small Claims Summons are specifically denied.

I am going to write a letter tonight telling Mr Travis that

a, I have not received any chq apart for the one sent a few months ago which i rejected and sent back. I will as him to cancel the chq, as I have no intentions of cashing it.

b, Why he is set me a chq for the same amount that I have rejected previously?

c, Giving him a copy of the schedule and stating that it has been sent to his colleague my Mr Smith many times in nearly all my letter to him.

Once again any advice if much appreciated!!!

My Court date is 19-Jun

[megan34]

And yet again they get away with 'they never received the papers' !! how many times can they use this line?

[Robertxc]

Is this court date the preliminary hearing?

[hondamad21]

Hi Robertxc,

 

Yes this is the preliminary hearing.

 

hondamad

 

P.S. mega34 I agree, however the judges must catch on sonner or later (I hope). vbmenu_register("postmenu_919179", true);

[hondamad21]

Well bang on 9am today received another special delivery letter from Mr Davies this time with the cheque included!!!

I should say that the chq is not for the amount i am claiming but the difference between £25 they charged and £12 OTF figure.

[elsinore]

He's been reading your thread!

 

Els

[hondamad21]

Ohh that sends a shiver down my spine :p:p

 

 

But seriously I am looking to meeting him or Mr Smith if they come this far north. I want to be able to say once and for all if Mr Smith really does look like Richard Gere

 

 

hondamad