Reduction in Transfer Rates to Velocity/Krisflyer

Status
Not open for further replies.

tharaka

Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2010
Posts
118
Thanks for posting citi's reply.

I think the verdict on if they're bound to pay any damages will be decided on if virgin raised their points value with citi or not.

If Virgin did raise the value of their points against citi then they're bound by the second clause where if the supplier raise the prices they pass it directly without notice.

If citi decided to devalue their points against virgin points then it's an issue with conversion rate any nothing else. In this case they have to go with the first clause regardless of if its citi or qantas card.
 
Sponsored Post

Struggling to use your Frequent Flyer Points?

Award Flight Assist takes the hard work out of finding award availability and redeeming your frequent flyer or credit card points for flights.

Using their expert knowledge and specialised tools, the Award Flight Assist team at Frequent Flyer Solutions will help you book a great trip that maximises the value for your points.

[email protected]

Active Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Posts
750
They are saying that they would have to give 90 days notice if they changed the conversion rate to Qantas points, as these are automatically converted on the fly every month.

Their T&Cs at 6.2 do not spell out Qantas points or automatic conversion, they simply refer to "change the rate at which all Points in the program are generally earned or converted"
 

Cynicor

Established Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2007
Posts
3,882
This is crazy. They obviously don't care about any bad publicity, or maybe we are just the fringe nuts. I'm out by around 36k SQ points, or 72k Of the new Citi Pesos.
 

kyle

Established Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Posts
1,508
Referring to Citi's reply to AustBT, I think they are adding new meaning to the clause to suit their needs.
 

kewpid

Junior Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Posts
24
I lodged a complaint through CitiBank's website, and the following is their response. I will be following up.

Thank you for your email.

We thank you for bringing this matter to our attention and regret that on this occasion you had been inconvenienced. Citibank is dedicated to its customers and your feedback is valued.

As per Rewards Terms & Conditions, if we change the point value of individual goods or services in the program to reflect changes in the
price charged by our suppliers for those goods or services, or if particular Rewards is unavailable, we will notify you on our rewards website at the time you redeem your Reward.

Under the rewards general terms and conditions, the 90-day notice is based on if a certain rewards program is removed in whole or it is a change to the way points are earned in the rewards program. The 90-day notice period does not apply to this situation.

If there is anything else we can do to assist you, please let us know and we will be happy to help.

Yours sincerely,
Citibank Online Customer Service

 

CJEMNMAC

Active Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Posts
968
I lodged a complaint through CitiBank's website, and the following is their response. I will be following up.

Why do they keep avoiding the word CONVERTED ? That response you received is a poor interpretation of clause 6.2..
 

heisenberg

Newbie
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Posts
2
Their T&Cs at 6.2 do not spell out Qantas points or automatic conversion, they simply refer to "change the rate at which all Points in the program are generally earned or converted"

Jessie tried the same argument, at which point I replied with "I am looking at the Terms and Conditions, and I cannot see that written anywhere". You can't infer terms and conditions, they must explicitly state them.

Whoa! I think you had the best offer so far. Because if Citi really gave us the 90 days warning, all you can do is either transfer all 18M points over at old rate and let it expire, or let it sit in Citi and devalue. So I doubt if your boss will be compensated with 6.4M points.


I figure they have set the bench mark, if they say no to Skyler’s request, we can always fall back on that offer or at least transfer a good some of them across.

Thanks for the great post!

Basically what Citi are offering you is about 2m points to compensate. That's a great offer in my opinion, given you asked for 6.4M and getting one third of it. Obviously the catch is you transfer all points to Velocity now.


Isn’t their offer the same as Skyler’s request, just structured differently?

18m x 0.6667 = ~12m
(18m+6m) x 0.5 = ~12m

Personally I'm wondering what 18M points is doing sitting with the bank, though of course there is no compunction on "Skyler" to divest points according to any given schedule. I'm not sure I'd be stockpiling like that for a retirement fund.

Skyler is earning them faster than she can use them (trust me, she drinks plenty of Krug with Singapore), hence having to store them covered in a tarp in a location which, in terms of total worst case, is better than an airline (a bank is less likely to go under than an airline/airline awards system).

heisenberg - love it! If you have no luck from here I have only one suggestion - 'Better call Saul'!

Glad someone picked up on my very subtle Breaking Bad references! J
 

GalaxyNexus

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Posts
255
Quote from the ACCC case:

"Loyalty program promoters risk misleading consumers and breaching the fair-trading provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 if they:

  • advertise awards that are not available as represented

  • hide in the fine print or fail to disclose the truth about the restrictions imposed on the redemption of those rewards

  • seek to retrospectively change programs or offers to the disadvantage of consumers."
 

daveozsydney

Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Posts
122
Ladies, Gents,

It appears there is little positive action or news from Citibank other than some miniscule offers.

If we don't get a significant positive outcome on this that restores us to the position of status quo with points earned upto 90 day notice being recieved at the old rates, plus compensation for all the wasted time these past few days, then we require just seven aggrieved members in order to pursue representative proceedings. These are, in essence, analogous to what are referred to in the United States as "class actions". It appears just on this forum thread there are in excess of seven members who have material losses as a result of this alleged breach of contract. There would be many thousand or tens of thousands affected by this change to a greater or lesser extend.

In simple terms a class action can be commenced under Part IVA of the Federal Court Act 1976 by a representative applicant in circumstances where seven or more people have a claim which arises out of "the same similar or related circumstances" that gives rise to a "substantial common issue of fact or law". The
representative plaintiff does not need the consent of the class members - indeed the representative plaintiff does not even need to know who they
are or where they live.

I'm happy (possibly wrong choice of word!) to initiate this process but I think we need to unite and put together a strongly worded litigation letter to citibank Senior Executive Team on behalf of several aggrieved members noting that this is the course of action that we intend to take, along with referral to the ACCC if we don't obtain these demands - rather than individually going backwards and forwards to Citibank with offers and counter offers to junior team members in the call centre/ online messages/ facebook teams etc.

In Australia under Part IVA of the Federal Court Act 1976, a member has to opt out of proceedings rather than opt in, which gives us an advantage over other jurisdictions.

In my opinion, the deck of cards and the letter of the law is stacked firmly on our side as follows:

1. ACCC matter with NAB where the outcome was a finding of a breach of the fair-trading provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 if they:


- advertise awards that are not available as represented

- hide in the fine print or fail to disclose the truth about the restrictions imposed on the redemption of those rewards

- seek to retrospectively change programs or offers to the disadvantage of consumers.


2. Clause 6.2 first bullet point - in the Citibank terms stating 90 days notice.

3. Clause 6.2 third bullet point - in the Citibank terms stating for goods and services we will notify you on our rewards website.

Technically there was no notification of the change and also technically points are not categorised as goods or services. They are rights to goods or services as defined in case law. Reference: ATO Ref: GSTR 2012/1

If you are a Citibank Customer (Signature or Prestige Rewards - NOT Qantas Card, not Business Cards at this stage) and would like to be included in this course of action (just the letter at this point, please let me know via PM) the following details:

First name
Last Name
Mailing address
E-mail
Contact Phone Number
Current Citibank Point Balance
Product (Signature or Prestige).


I will not be charging a fee for the drafting of this letter, and will be doing this in my own time. If there are any Solicitors affected here with litigation or representative proceedings experience who would like to help in the drafting on a pro bono basis, and with this crowdsourced action then all help would be appreciated. Obviously would need to check and declare if there is a conflict of interest if your firm represents Citibank.
Could be a nice addition to your resume as well ;)

Thanks in advance,

Dave
 

VAG newbie

Active Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2013
Posts
839
Ladies, Gents,

It appears there is little positive action or news from Citibank other than some miniscule offers.

If we don't get a significant positive outcome on this that restores us to the position of status quo with points earned upto 90 day notice being recieved at the old rates, plus compensation for all the wasted time these past few days, then we require just seven aggrieved members in order to pursue representative proceedings. These are, in essence, analogous to what are referred to in the United States as "class actions". It appears just on this forum thread there are in excess of seven members who have material losses as a result of this alleged breach of contract. There would be many thousand or tens of thousands affected by this change to a greater or lesser extend.

In simple terms a class action can be commenced under Part IVA of the Federal Court Act 1976 by a representative applicant in circumstances where seven or more people have a claim which arises out of "the same similar or related circumstances" that gives rise to a "substantial common issue of fact or law". The
representative plaintiff does not need the consent of the class members - indeed the representative plaintiff does not even need to know who they
are or where they live.

I'm happy (possibly wrong choice of word!) to initiate this process but I think we need to unite and put together a strongly worded litigation letter to citibank Senior Executive Team on behalf of several aggrieved members noting that this is the course of action that we intend to take, along with referral to the ACCC if we don't obtain these demands - rather than individually going backwards and forwards to Citibank with offers and counter offers to junior team members in the call centre/ online messages/ facebook teams etc.

In Australia under Part IVA of the Federal Court Act 1976, a member has to opt out of proceedings rather than opt in, which gives us an advantage over other jurisdictions.

In my opinion, the deck of cards and the letter of the law is stacked firmly on our side as follows:

1. ACCC matter with NAB where the outcome was a finding of a breach of the fair-trading provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 if they:


- advertise awards that are not available as represented

- hide in the fine print or fail to disclose the truth about the restrictions imposed on the redemption of those rewards

- seek to retrospectively change programs or offers to the disadvantage of consumers.


2. Clause 6.2 first bullet point - in the Citibank terms stating 90 days notice.

3. Clause 6.2 third bullet point - in the Citibank terms stating for goods and services we will notify you on our rewards website.

Technically there was no notification of the change and also technically points are not categorised as goods or services. They are rights to goods or services as defined in case law. Reference: ATO Ref: GSTR 2012/1

If you are a Citibank Customer (Signature or Prestige Rewards - NOT Qantas Card, not Business Cards at this stage) and would like to be included in this course of action (just the letter at this point, please let me know via PM) the following details:

First name
Last Name
Mailing address
E-mail
Contact Phone Number
Current Citibank Point Balance
Product (Signature or Prestige).


I will not be charging a fee for the drafting of this letter, and will be doing this in my own time. If there are any Solicitors affected here with litigation or representative proceedings experience who would like to help in the drafting on a pro bono basis, and with this crowdsourced action then all help would be appreciated. Obviously would need to check and declare if there is a conflict of interest if your firm represents Citibank.
Could be a nice addition to your resume as well ;)

Thanks in advance,

Dave

Count me in! I guess if Citi wants to stick to 6.2.3, they also need to provide evidence that VA and KF raised the price for them to "reflect" the change in price. They also need to prove that the price was raised suddenly that Citibank had no time to inform us. Otherwise, they are obviously violating the fair trading with misleading fine prints.
 

[email protected]

Active Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Posts
750
If you are a Citibank Customer (Signature or Prestige Rewards - NOT Qantas Card, not Business Cards at this stage) and would like to be included in this course of action (just the letter at this point, please let me know via PM) the following details:

Count me in! PM sent, thanks Dave!
 
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Posts
141
Ladies, Gents,

It appears there is little positive action or news from Citibank other than some miniscule offers.

If we don't get a significant positive outcome on this that restores us to the position of status quo with points earned upto 90 day notice being recieved at the old rates, plus compensation for all the wasted time these past few days, then we require just seven aggrieved members in order to pursue representative proceedings. These are, in essence, analogous to what are referred to in the United States as "class actions". It appears just on this forum thread there are in excess of seven members who have material losses as a result of this alleged breach of contract. There would be many thousand or tens of thousands affected by this change to a greater or lesser extend.

In simple terms a class action can be commenced under Part IVA of the Federal Court Act 1976 by a representative applicant in circumstances where seven or more people have a claim which arises out of "the same similar or related circumstances" that gives rise to a "substantial common issue of fact or law". The
representative plaintiff does not need the consent of the class members - indeed the representative plaintiff does not even need to know who they
are or where they live.

I'm happy (possibly wrong choice of word!) to initiate this process but I think we need to unite and put together a strongly worded litigation letter to citibank Senior Executive Team on behalf of several aggrieved members noting that this is the course of action that we intend to take, along with referral to the ACCC if we don't obtain these demands - rather than individually going backwards and forwards to Citibank with offers and counter offers to junior team members in the call centre/ online messages/ facebook teams etc.

In Australia under Part IVA of the Federal Court Act 1976, a member has to opt out of proceedings rather than opt in, which gives us an advantage over other jurisdictions.

In my opinion, the deck of cards and the letter of the law is stacked firmly on our side as follows:

1. ACCC matter with NAB where the outcome was a finding of a breach of the fair-trading provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 if they:


- advertise awards that are not available as represented

- hide in the fine print or fail to disclose the truth about the restrictions imposed on the redemption of those rewards

- seek to retrospectively change programs or offers to the disadvantage of consumers.


2. Clause 6.2 first bullet point - in the Citibank terms stating 90 days notice.

3. Clause 6.2 third bullet point - in the Citibank terms stating for goods and services we will notify you on our rewards website.

Technically there was no notification of the change and also technically points are not categorised as goods or services. They are rights to goods or services as defined in case law. Reference: ATO Ref: GSTR 2012/1

If you are a Citibank Customer (Signature or Prestige Rewards - NOT Qantas Card, not Business Cards at this stage) and would like to be included in this course of action (just the letter at this point, please let me know via PM) the following details:

First name
Last Name
Mailing address
E-mail
Contact Phone Number
Current Citibank Point Balance
Product (Signature or Prestige).


I will not be charging a fee for the drafting of this letter, and will be doing this in my own time. If there are any Solicitors affected here with litigation or representative proceedings experience who would like to help in the drafting on a pro bono basis, and with this crowdsourced action then all help would be appreciated. Obviously would need to check and declare if there is a conflict of interest if your firm represents Citibank.
Could be a nice addition to your resume as well ;)

Thanks in advance,

Dave

Hi Dave - thanks for taking the time with this! I assume you are in the legal profession?

I have 2.8m Citibank points. I am now almost 500k KF points worse off thanks to the recent changes. Not happy. Logged a complaint yesterday and waiting for a call back from a "manager".

If the resolution after this call is unsatisfactory, I will be more than happy to be included in the letter to Citibank's executive team.

Thanks again for your efforts.

Cheers
 

thizho

Junior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Posts
20
Thank you for your email.

We thank you for bringing this matter to our attention and regret that on this occasion you had been inconvenienced. Citibank is dedicated to its customers and your feedback is valued.

As per Rewards Terms & Conditions, if we change the point value of individual goods or services in the program to reflect changes in the
price charged by our suppliers for those goods or services, or if particular Rewards is unavailable, we will notify you on our rewards website at the time you redeem your Reward.

Under the rewards general terms and conditions, the 90-day notice is based on if a certain rewards program is removed in whole or it is a change to the way points are earned in the rewards program. The 90-day notice period does not apply to this situation.

If there is anything else we can do to assist you, please let us know and we will be happy to help.

Yours sincerely,
Citibank Online Customer Service

They didn't give any notice when they removed AVIOS (a whole program) earlier in the year. Citi are contradicting themselves.
 

ninja-tim

Active Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2013
Posts
739
It's all the fault of Velocity, oh and Krisflyer, oh and QFF, all simultaneously putting up the charge for their points. It has nothing at all to do with Citi, they are the victims in all this. :rolleyes:
Did the QFF conversion rate change as well?
 

turnip666

Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Posts
221
Did the QFF conversion rate change as well?
IN my case, yes.
Direct sweep cards seemingly not affected but I have Citibusiness Gold and could then select which program to transfer to.

ALL previous points had been at 1:1 but after reading this thread I checked and it is now at 1:2. That hits me for 75000 QFF points gone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top