martin3030 v citibank** Update 12th February 2009**

[Jeff2000]

Take them on Jeff,demand that they cease ALL attempted recovery and close the file.

If they dont give you this undertaking in writing then sue.

 

 

 

 

Hi Martin,

 

 

I have my plans for Cabot!

 

They have, allegedly, 3 accounts. 2 from Citi, of which I doubt they have any paperwork at all!

 

The other is an alleged Goldfish account, of which I have never had, but may actually refers to a different account!

 

I am just letting them send letters etc, in order to give 'em enough rope!!

 

 

Best wishes, Jeff.

[MARTIN3030]

Ok good.

 

Right onto the other issue of the mysterious addresses.

 

Checking on the Consumer Credit database Heres Citis entries.

 

 

Current Address(es):

 

Address TypeAddress CorrespondenceCiti Group Centre, Canada Square, Canary Wharf, London, E14 5LB, United Kingdom Principal Place Of Business87, Castle Street, Reading, Berkshire, RG1 7DX Registered Office87, Castle Street, Reading, Berkshire, RG1 7DX

 

Now as far as I am aware,they have a requirement to notify and update these details as and when there are changes.

I see Reading is still listed as the H.0.

 

I will be writing to the FSA to seek clarification.

[MARTIN3030]

As I posted,The FSA confirmed that Canary Wharf is in process of being added as their registered offices,and it is taken as being applicable from August.

Therefore I intend to contact my Court to ask them to resend anything since August to Canary Wharf.

I have grave suspicions that they will wait for a hearing to pass,let me apply for judgement and then claim they got nothing.....knowing of course that potentially this gives them ANOTHER 6 months !!!

[MARTIN3030]

Bundle in progress now-I have to get this in by 24th.Dec.

In regard to the mysteries of Citi's whereabouts,I have found the last communication I had from them.Its dated 1st October 2008 and shows Salford address at the top of the letter.

On the bottom-is the registered office in Canary Wharf.

 

So given that I know they were still there on that date-means they have no chance to try and say they did not get notices from me or the Court.

 

If anyone is faced with Citi trying to stall proceedings,by saying the Salford office was unoperational-I will be happy to provide a copy of my dated letter,along with authority for it to be shown to the Courts.

It would be reasonable to assume that it was still operational up until October 1st at the least.

[MARTIN3030]

Well I started copying and filing the papers at 11.00am on Sunday morning.

Its now 4.35 on Monday morning and I am still at it.

Ran out of paper at 1.30am so have been redrafing other stuff.

I reckon I have another 200 pages still to copy including 45 docs relating to the defaults and Dcas I have to do 3 copies of that so theres 135 pages.

I am ready for bed-its been stressful to do and I have only had about an hour away from the PC.

I cannot contemplate the value of a wasted costs order,but its going to be quite big I can tell you.

After doing all this for 28 months I wouldnt even settle now unless they agree to pay the time for 1400 pages of legal stuff.

Absolutely Krackered.

[MARTIN3030]

Done and dusted.Filed at Court and copies sent to Eversheds at cost of £16.00 for SD.

I emailed Eversheds in advance to remind them.

Usually I would not have done that,but I dont want proceedings to be stalled again.

The order was just for exchanges and so no directions for failure.

I know Cities tactics in forcing claimants to apply for orders which they will always defend and know it adds more time for them.

Eversheds to my suprise have replied to my email to say their docs will be with me and the Court by tomorrow which is last day !!

 

I note there is no contact details for Eversheds in this forum so will stickie some for future reference.

[wednesday1867]

Guess Christmas Eve wasn't an ideal time to get it all done for, im sure i would of cracked under the strain

[MARTIN3030]

Yes it was a wrench-I had 2 all nighters with Sunday going to bed at 5am and Monday at 7am !!

 

Postman woke me at 7.30 with Citi defence.

Have glanced over it.

Includes 3 refs to wins they have had-one where a claimant had to pay them back following 2 prev claims-that was Salford June 2007

A case from Stoke on Trent.

Their skeleton is about 17 pages.

Theres snippets from the OFT report plus Dunlop and other precs.

They sent copy pf terms and condsdated 30th April 2007

yet mine relate to their old terms.

They have printed a sep doc covering clauses 7 and 12.

Transcript of Jobson v Johnson dated April 1988

 

Plus some other house of commons stuff.

Theres the £13 + costing sheet but no sign of the 12.00 one.

 

Does this look like standard Citi disclosure ?

[Enron]

There successful claims dont mean toffee, small claims cases can't make case law and as such should not be relied on by a judge..... likewise we have many victories. They will know this but I believe they are put in their to unsettle the claimant.

 

Its likely that Eversheds are ammending a standard defence as preparred by the bods in Salford last year.

 

Was upto 5.30am this morning getting all my documents printed out for the FOS, bloke sounded as he didnt believe me when I mentioned that 1st Credit had faked a Notice Of Assignment.... so guess they'll love my docs when they review them.

[wednesday1867]

I hope i dont get all that

[MARTIN3030]

The Default fee justification of 13.47 also says that the measurement period is calculated on the basis of actual and forecast expense for 2008 together with actual and expected frequency of fee billing for 2008.

 

But my charges all relate to June 2002 to July 2004.

How can they rely on a measurement based on forecasts and expense billing for 2008 ?

[MARTIN3030]

My case today was listed for 3 hours.

St.Helens Court has only 2 chambers operating-mine was reserved for the morning session.

Unfortunately the defence yet again drew a halt to the proceedings.

The acting Solicitor for Eversheds claimed that he did not have anything like the substantive documents the Judge had-in fact he claimed only to have a few pages.

I stated that I had sent the bundle to Eversheds on 23rd December and had proof of posting and delivery for 2 packets.In email exchanges prior to sending this Eversheds were aware I was sending it,and confirmed theirs would be sent on the 23rd also.

 

I am extremely concerned and angry and told the Judge so.I also informed the Court that this was not isolated and was a frequent ploy by the defendants to frustrate proceedings.

The Judge felt it was inconcievable to proceed with trial given that the defence has not seen my submissions.

I dont want to say to much here since I am more than aware of both Citifinancial AND Eversheds monitoring of these threads.

I will just say that I intend to submit to the Court,evidence of all the cases I am aware of whereby the defendants have claimed the same thing.

 

They should not be allowed to do this time and time again.It is a clear abuse of process and there can be no excuses or good reasoning to say otherwise.

 

I am quite suprised that they choose to pull this tac on me,but I clearly should have had proof of delivery with me in Court-although the Judge was able to see a letter I had sent with my Court bundle stating that I had sent the defence the bundle.This in itself was not proof.

 

The order was made for me to resubmit within 14 days further copies of all documents I will be relying on.

 

Needless to say,I will be putting together an application for costs-since on the next appearance I will certainly show proof of delivery of the bundle the first time.

 

 

One point that was discussed was Citis offices.

The acting Solicitor claimed that Salford was still operational-despite me saying that Citi claimed otherwise.He said that the London address was their corporate office.

It is my understanding that in all cases Eversheds are registering their address and contact details with the courts for any communications to be sent there.

 

So if any clamants are already engaged in litigation then all Legal notices should be sent to Eversheds.

If your case has been stayed-make sure that your Court has this info on file.

 

Finally-it goes without saying-make sure you take proof of post and delivery of all comms to Court with you.

I actually had these for all my other letters to Citi in my bundle.

I just did not have the one proof that was needed today with me.

 

I expect it will be a few weeks before I have another trial,but I can assure Eversheds that I am more than eager for that date-sooner rather than later.

[Enron]

Standard stuff, the bods at Citi or Eversheds trying to frustrate the legal process.

[pompeyfaith]

Where do i stand on this abuse i requested documents on the 16th july 2008 from optima legal solicitors acting for MBNA and did not get them until 30th December 2008 they sent me a letter on the 30th July 2008 saying they have instructed Mbna but i was unable to do anything as the letter was headed WITHOUT PREJUDICE but now they are using that letter in court as evidance.

 

They have shown no regard to CPR all thoughout this case

 

Regards

 

Pompeyfaith

[wednesday1867]

Do you know when your back in Court?

[MARTIN3030]

Yes late June.-so around 6 weeks time.

[Rhia]

subbing

[Castlebest]

Woohoo looks like fun I'v just sent off my N1 (at long last) so watching with interest

 

pete

[pedross]

Hi Martin

 

It is late and I have had a few beers but I have read through this thread with interest.

 

At this very moment I feel that my comments may be of use to you but if we both feel that they have no relevence in the morning then it was not me posting them.

 

Now... I believe that the recent Halifax result in the Leeds Court on another thread, which I do not have access to at the moment, would be very useful at your next hearing, if you continue to have problems with the other side abusing the normal court procedures.

 

You have probably read it but, in my opinion, the bottom line is that as the courts gain more experience of this blatant abuse of the court process then they will get tough on the people who are trying to clog up the system. I suggest that you obtain a copy of the transcript and use it to prove your point if you have further problems.

Regards

Pedross

[MARTIN3030]

Pedross anyone who does not admit to having a few beers on Sat night is either telling porkies or is a boring git....I know I have had a few too.

Yep I take on board what you say.

Ta !

[MARTIN3030]

Can you give me a link to Leeds case ?

[MARTIN3030]

Woohoo looks like fun I'v just sent off my N1 (at long last) so watching with interest

 

pete

 

 

Bout time Pete

[wednesday1867]

Yes late June.-so around 6 weeks time.

 

 

Any news on how it went?

[pedross]

Unfortunately I have the transcript but not a link to the thread. This was the case:

IN THE LEEDS COUNTY COURT Case No: 9LS70096

The Combined Court Centre

Oxford Row

Leeds

1st June 2009

Before

HIS HONOUR JUDGE LANGAN QC

__________

BANK OF SCOTLAND

(Claimant)

-v-

ROBERT MITCHELL

(Defendant

I think it was a Halifax credit card problem but I do not know who was posting. If I come across it again will post the link.

Pedross

[Rhia]

Is there any way we can get to see the transcript - even by email? PM me if you can.