Citibank readyCredit - Give yourself a present this xmas

[dazzling]

I too am one of the many people in the same situation with the citibank cash back offer.

We will all wait for our individual responses from citibank ( at request and with the assistance of the Ombudsman ). If we do not get the " desired " result we are seeking, a class action against citibank may be on the cards.

 

[e_wolfe]

Hi again,
I received a letter today from the Banking Ombudsman indicating that following discussions between Citibank and the Ombudsman, Citibank are now willing to offer a settlement of an amount which is 1/3rd the amount they really owe me as cash back. It is an improvement on the original offer of $500, but still well short of what they should be paying. I have until the 20th of April to let the Ombudsman know if I accept the offer or not. I have not actually received anything from Citibank as yet with the new offer - only the letter from the Ombudsman. Has anyone else recieved anything from either Citibank or the Ombudsman?

One of my concerns is that the Ombudsman is funded from contributions from the banks. Perhaps it would be more useful to complain to ASIC who are truely independant.

 

[Mahtoh]

I would not worry about the ombudsman's independance.

 

[kaki]

e-wolfe,

Glad to hear that there is some progress. Citibank has until 26/03 to repond to my case. So far, I have only received an acknowledgement from Citibank's Head of Customer Advocacy.

I work for statutory body and I know of enforcement agencies which are funded by the people they police. This does not necessarily compromise the agencies' position. Having said that, the outcome of each dispute is dependent on the individual officer's conduct.

I am not sure whether you are incline to accept the offer but I hope you do not. Irrespective of what your eventual decision is, I suggest that you ask for the offer in writing first before you show your card. It is in the interest of the Ombudsman Office and Citibank to close the case ASAP. If you show your card too soon, they can sniff out your weakness. It wouldn't be long then before you find them moving towards an apparent satisfactory position which may not be consistent with your real aim.

Personally, I have gone past the stage of settling for anything less than 100% of the claim. If I had been offered something between 50-100% last month, I might consider because an early settlement then would be a gain for both parties. Unfortunately, the $500 was obscenely inadequate.

By accepting the 1/3rd payment, Citibank saves 2/3rd and you lose 2/3rd. Don't forget the lost time - and lost interest. Ask yourself why you should accept that at this late stage.

Citibank offered $500 with the attitude 'take it or lose it'. We were told that we risk losing the $500 altogether. We now know Citibank reiterated the offer despite our action. In other words, Citibank is desperate for us to go away with $500. If not $500, they up the ante to 1/3rd. What would they do if we don't accept 1/3rd ?

The Ombudsman Office should not be a broker for the settlement. The revised 1/3rd has to come from Citibank. With that offer Citibank has to justify why they should benefit 2/3rd.

For your information, I have gathered evidence that Citibank actually paid out small claims eventhough that customer merely drew cheques and deposit the money into another bank account. There was no question about 'purchasing goods and services'. I have also secured the consent of that customer to testify and to provide supporting evidence against Citibank. Hence, the only reason Citibank is not honouring the claims is effectively nullified.

All the best to all.

 

[kaki]

e-wolfe,

Glad to hear that there is some progress. Citibank has until 26/03 to repond to my case. So far, I have only received an acknowledgement from Citibank's Head of Customer Advocacy.

I work for statutory body and I know of enforcement agencies which are funded by the people they police. This does not necessarily compromise the agencies' position. Having said that, the outcome of each dispute is dependent on the individual officer's conduct.

I am not sure whether you are incline to accept the offer but I hope you do not. Irrespective of what your eventual decision is, I suggest that you ask for the offer in writing first before you show your card. It is in the interest of the Ombudsman Office and Citibank to close the case ASAP. If you show your card too soon, they can sniff out your weakness. It wouldn't be long then before you find them moving towards an apparent satisfactory position which may not be consistent with your real aim.

Personally, I have gone past the stage of settling for anything less than 100% of the claim. If I had been offered something between 50-100% last month, I might consider because an early settlement then would be a gain for both parties. Unfortunately, the $500 was obscenely inadequate.

By accepting the 1/3rd payment, Citibank saves 2/3rd and you lose 2/3rd. Don't forget the lost time - and lost interest. Ask yourself why you should accept that at this late stage.

Citibank offered $500 with the attitude 'take it or lose it'. We were told that we risk losing the $500 altogether. We now know Citibank reiterated the offer despite our action. In other words, Citibank is desperate for us to go away with $500. If not $500, they up the ante to 1/3rd. What would they do if we don't accept 1/3rd ?

The Ombudsman Office should not be a broker for the settlement. The revised 1/3rd has to come from Citibank. With that offer Citibank has to justify why they should benefit 2/3rd.

For your information, I have gathered evidence that Citibank actually paid out small claims eventhough that customer merely drew cheques and deposit the money into another bank account. There was no question about 'purchasing goods and services'. I have also secured the consent of that customer to testify and to provide supporting evidence against Citibank. Hence, the only reason Citibank is not honouring the claims is effectively nullified.

All the best to all.

 

[kaki]

e-wolfe,

Glad to hear that there is some progress. Citibank has until 26/03 to repond to my case. So far, I have only received an acknowledgement from Citibank's Head of Customer Advocacy.

I work for statutory body and I know of enforcement agencies which are funded by the people they police. This does not necessarily compromise the agencies' position. Having said that, the outcome of each dispute is dependent on the individual officer's conduct.

I am not sure whether you are incline to accept the offer but I hope you do not. Irrespective of what your eventual decision is, I suggest that you ask for the offer in writing first before you show your card. It is in the interest of the Ombudsman Office and Citibank to close the case ASAP. If you show your card too soon, they can sniff out your weakness. It wouldn't be long then before you find them moving towards an apparent satisfactory position which may not be consistent with your real aim.

Personally, I have gone past the stage of settling for anything less than 100% of the claim. If I had been offered something between 50-100% last month, I might consider because an early settlement then would be a gain for both parties. Unfortunately, the $500 was obscenely inadequate.

By accepting the 1/3rd payment, Citibank saves 2/3rd and you lose 2/3rd. Don't forget the lost time - and lost interest. Ask yourself why you should accept that at this late stage.

Citibank offered $500 with the attitude 'take it or lose it'. We were told that we risk losing the $500 altogether. We now know Citibank reiterated the offer despite our action. In other words, Citibank is desperate for us to go away with $500. If not $500, they up the ante to 1/3rd. What would they do if we don't accept 1/3rd ?

The Ombudsman Office should not be a broker for the settlement. The revised 1/3rd has to come from Citibank. With that offer Citibank has to justify why they should benefit 2/3rd.

For your information, I have gathered evidence that Citibank actually paid out small claims eventhough that customer merely drew cheques and deposit the money into another bank account. There was no question about 'purchasing goods and services'. I have also secured the consent of that customer to testify and to provide supporting evidence against Citibank. Hence, the only reason Citibank is not honouring the claims is effectively nullified.

All the best to all.

 

[New Chump]

My gut feel is along the lines of kaki's post(s!).

Citibank still has a few more days to repond to my particular case.

Did the Ombudsman explain why the Ombudsman thought it was acceptable for Citibank to pay 1/3 of the amount that Citibank agreed to pay? Maybe a chat with the Ombudsman's investiating officer is in order.

If what has been provided to you is a "Finding", I thought that you could reject it and the case will be referred to the actual Ombudsman who can make a formal Recommendation about how the dispute should be resolved.

I think that, with minimal effort on your behalf to date (ie rejection of Citibank's initial $500 offer, writing a complaint to the Ombudsman and a few posts on the site) Citibank has increased its offer to its current level. My gut is saying, with a bit more effort, Citibank can (and frankly should) come up a lot more.

Looking forward to my letter from Mr Omudsman.

NC

 

[kaki]

My apologies for the multiple mouse clicks I made last night which resulted in multiple postings. Perhaps I have a burning desire to upgrade my status to 'Senior Member' (I believe the number of postings counts, right ?)

I have just received a phone call from Citibank, just 2 working days before the deadline. Apparently, they are preparing an offer for me now. I was asked for details on how I spent the money. I categorically replied that how I used the money is a private matter and I am not offering the information. That was the end of the pleasant conversation.

 

[dazzling]

I to was contacted by Citibank, who requested the same thing.They wanted me to provide transaction reciepts of what I spent the money on.I quizzed the consultant to outline where it is in the terms and conditions,where it is recommended that I disclose this information.He mentioned it wasn't in the T& C's and it was for there benefit so that they can come up with a better offer.Nevertheless the statement provided by the bank is an adequate record for them to use.3 days before the deadline!! what a joke

 

[kaki]

I can feel the noose is tightening up around Citibank's neck. With the full page article on Money and possibly the volume of Ombudsman submission, Citibank is feeling the pressure now. Else, Citibank could just carry on business as usual for the last 2-3 days. I reckon that citibank is simply going fishing with the calls made at this late stage - to fish more excuses not to pay. It would be more credible for Citibank if the excuses are offered by the claimants. So, I suggest that we do not fall into that trap.

 

[dazzling]

Hi All,

Today I had the pleasure of speaking with Slater & Gordon Lawyers and was pleased to note that a number of enquiries have be lodged.re Citibank Cash back Offer not honoured.
If the Citibank/Ombudsman don't resolve to your satisfaction.

Call : 1800 555 777 to record your interest.

http://www.slatergordon.com.au/contactus/newclientenquiries.asp

 

[e_wolfe]

Call : 1800 555 777 to record your interest.

http://www.slatergordon.com.au/contactus/newclientenquiries.asp

Thanks for the information. I rang Slater & Gordon today to register my interest. I then rang Citibank and told them I reject their offer of 1/3rd of what they owe me and said that only the full amount would stop me proceeding with legal action. I hope everyone does the same.

 

[netaddict]

Call : 1800 555 777 to record your interest.

http://www.slatergordon.com.au/contactus/newclientenquiries.asp

Thanks for the information. I rang Slater & Gordon today to register my interest. I then rang Citibank and told them I reject their offer of 1/3rd of what they owe me and said that only the full amount would stop me proceeding with legal action. I hope everyone does the same.

Out of interest did Citibank comment or say anything when you advised you will proceed with legal action?

 

[e_wolfe]

Out of interest did Citibank comment or say anything when you advised you will proceed with legal action?

I told the Citibank employee at the customer advocacy unit that I reject their claim that the promotion was only for the purchase of goods and services. I then said that even if that was the case - all of my transactions involved cheque deposits to my home loan and therefore, at the time of each deposit they contributed to my ownership of a good - being my apartment. So my transactions should still be eligible under their "updated" definition. I said I did not accept the 1/3rd offer and he asked how much I would be willing to settle for. I replied that only the full amount would be acceptable otherwise I see no other way to settle the dispute other than legal action. I let them know I had spoken with Gordon and Slater and he said he would pass on my remarks to those handling the disputes - but he said he didn't believe that they would change their minds.

 

[Mahtoh]

Forget going to Slater and Gordon.

Go to fics - for free. They cannot appeal from FICS' decision but you are not bound by it in any way - and it is free for you to use.

www.fics.asn.au

 

[bits]

The BFSO has jurisdiction over Citibank. FICS is the BFSO equivalent for the financial services industry, not the banking industry.

Besides Citibank is not a member of FICS (though other subsidiaries of Citigroup are), therefore FICS can't do squat to help you.

Fingers crossed for a good outcome from BFSO.

If we get Slater and Gordon (or any other legal firm) involved, anyone know how the cost of such action is calculated and the costs arising due to losing the case? I haven't had a chance to speak to them yet.

I assume any class action will seek that Citibank pay the claims fully and also the cost of the legal firm?

 

[Mahtoh]

There you go, learn something new every day. Wouldn't citibank have to have an AFSL and therefore be amenable to FICS?

 

[bits]

FICS is the External Dispute Resolution (EDR) scheme for the financial services industry, including life insurance, pooled superannuation trusts, funds management, financial advice, stock broking, investment advice and sales of financial or investment products.

BFSO is the EDR scheme for Banks.

 

[kaki]

Comrades

Citibank responded to my complaint on the very last day. No change in position. The $500 alternative offer still stands. It appears that Citibank is doing selective treatment again. In Citibank's response, I was made to look bad - as though I did not cooperate. In actual fact, I was asked to provide one thing which would breach my privacy on the day before Citibank responded.

I have declined the repeated offer. I have also urged BFSO to proceed.

Another update ... I am aware that the sub-editor of Money magazine is talking to ASIC about our cases. There may be more coverage in the magazine.

I wish there would be more financial/investment related periodicals covering this story. That would surely (I think) shred Citibank apart.

 

[Mahtoh]

What exactly did the response say?