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
