I have posted this on several boards that I am a member of, but would love others opinions. I am working hard to work out agreements with all my creditors and have been extremely successful, with an occasional setback. I am attempting to work with creditors and pay my own debt through temporary or long-term low (or no) interest agreements. I made an oral agreement that was verified (in writing) by Citi regarding a $9K cc debt. I am paying $100 per month at 0% interest for a year and then we will re-evaluate my financial situation. Unfortunately, I couldn't make the payment in January and resigned myself to eventual charge-off and increased collection efforts. However, I spoke with Citi and shut down the January ACH deduction from one of my checking accounts. They called me several times explaining I was in violation of my agreement and if I did not make good on the payment, I would lose the agreement. After a few days, I received a call from Citi telling me that they would like to continue to work with me. I returned the call and recorded the entire conversation (Completely legal in Oregon.) They said they could "ignore" the missed payment in January, and I could make it up in the future (beginning April) by adding an additional $20 for five months. I agreed and confirmed that they would only take the $100 payment this month (February) and they specifically stated that they would not deduct the missing $100 payment also. We could work this out at a future time. I clearly stated their offer of continuance in the program and asked for a clear verbal statement that they would only hold me accountable for the Feb payment, and we could discuss the missing payment in April. In addition, they clearly stated our previous agreement was Not In Jeopardy. Keep in mind, I recorded their very CRYSTAL CLEAR response. Today I received a phone call demanding the $100 January payment by the 10th of Feb. I explained that I already spoke with and reached an agreement with Citi. They stated my agreement was in jeopardy! I asked to speak with a "supervisor" and informed her I had a solid recording of the previous conversation allowing me to make ONLY the Feb payment and begin making up the missing Jan payment in April. She repeated that I must make the Jan payment by the 10th. I again explained that I could not make 2 payments in Feb and had recorded evidence that Citi already understood this and verbally agreed to the makeup payment in the future. Does anyone have an idea of how to proceed? Should I cancel the February payment and forget about dealing with Citi. In my mind they are now in breach of their own agreement of which I have recorded. Or, should I return the call again, and record them telling me a different story (I was traveling today and didn't record the call that "my agreement was in jeopardy.) I'm assuming that if I am sued, I could present evidence that Citi made one agreement and then reneged. The recorded .wav file is clear and very explicit as to what they would allow. Who is in violation of contract law here? Today, they stated that there was nothing in their notes that suggested they would accept additional $20 payments beginning in April, for 5 months, yet I have a clear recording of them agreeing to just these terms. Should I consult an attorney? Should I call them once again and get recorded information related to their immediate demand for the missing payment, and then submit both recordings to a consumer advocate attorney? It seems that Citi has no sense of what they have or have not agreed to. Iw askind to everyone involved today, and clearly expressed my frustration that "we already have an agreement that was recorded." I'm beginning to think that the call was some "commission" employee only interested in gathering the $100 January payment and did not have the mental capacity to understand the previous agreement from mid-January. However, I have never backed away from the fact that I owe them money and am willing to work within their parameters. I'm wondering what a district court judge would think of Citi if they sued and I submitted my recordings as evidence that I bent over backwards to accommodate Citi and they agreed, only to back away on a clear verbal agreement. What are your thoughts? Should I ignore the call today and see how this plays out, but be prepared to find a high-powered attorney who might take this on? Is Citi so disfunctional that they have such poor record-keeping ability to read their own notes on an agreement? Or, did the representative who agreed to the additional $20 payments beginning in April not bother to make the correct notes? Who is "in violation" of a contract/agreement here? Thanks!
IMHO, make the February payment as per the verbal agreement you want them to stick to. If you ever need to "prove in a court of law" that you thought it was an agreement, then you better be treating it like you believe it to be valid. Something else you may want to do..... Since you have the wav file, type up a transcript or get a good typist to help you. Get it notarized as being a true and accurate account of the recorded conversion between "John Q. Consumer" and "Joe Smack, Citi-CSR, badge #" on "Date, blah, blah" If you are contacted again before April concerning the missed January 2008 payment, you will be forced to file a complaint with everyone but the Pope! (Look more on this site for more specific complaint wording.) State that you will be making your regularly scheduled February and March payments and you will be speaking to them in April concerning the January payment and arrangements will be made at that time. I'm sure someone more financially mature may have something more experienced to say. 8)
Two of the main points here have been addressed: 1) Documenting your "understanding" of the agreement. First, keep the recording in a safe place, and second have the conversation transcribed and send to Citi. 2) Keep the payment arrangements you agreed to. It is critical for you to not breach the "contract". Whatever you agreed to, then keep that part up. If Citi accepts your payments, then they're acting "as if" the agreement were a contract. P.S. Be sure to send the transcript Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested.
Thanks. Obviously, they did not have an obligation to continue working with me after I missed one of the payments on the temporary 0% interest plan, however, they contacted me about continuing on the plan. I'm assuming that they are so busy they don't always read the complete notes on an account before they call. I'll let the Feb payment post, and wait this out.
Dont you all forget: Citi has been crooked outfit since Day #1. Recent newsreports has them losing BILLIONS because of the mortgage/foreclosure events, and credit card defaults. Now they are in anticipation of a Democrat becoming President and Democrats having the majority in Congress next year - who will probably undo some of the creditor friendly provisions of the 2005 bankruptcy laws. Before that happens - now they are hurrying to hound debtors and cheat their way by lying through their teeth about what the OP posted.
Citi is NOT a crooked outfit. They operate under the laws of the OCC and the SEC. Many banks and mortgage companies have had a lot of foreclosures. It doesn't mean they're crooked, it means they made some bad business decisions. In some cases, it was done because other banks and mortgage companies were offering no or low interest intro products. If others don't offer the same or similar products, they will lost business, much to the dismay of their shareholders, to whom they report. As for the bankruptcy laws, I'm not sure I'd bank on them being changed in the near future. You don't even know what the outcome of the elections will be, and even under a Democratic administration the changes may not be what you think. The banking lobby is very strong. The OP's problem was making an oral agreement with a CSR that was not immediately reduced to writing. I would have asked for a supervisor and gotten a written agreement faxed immediately. Citigroup has 327,000 full-time employees. You can't expect an oral agreement with one of them to be known by all. The OP has no proof that the CRS even recorded it in his records. Even if the CRS didn't follow procedures, that doesn't make the company crooked. It means there is a bad employee who needs to be dealt with.
