Moores2525 v BarclayCard **SETTLED IN FULL**

[paul.terry]

Hi everyone.

Today I have received copy statements from Oct 2004 to June 2006 and the same letter you all seem to be getting:

"Further to your request for personal data held by Barclaycard, please find enclosed a copy of the relevant information from May 2004.

Statements that are prior to this date are not held on a computer system or a structured relevant filing system and therefore, they do not fall under the Data Protection Act 1998. They can be obtained from our Customer Services Dept at a cost of £3 per statement."

Firstly, if it says "from May 2004" then why do my statements start Oct 2004?

Secondly, What can be done about the "microfiche" records? Has any one got past this yet? I don't see why they can't supply said statements on one hand at £3 per statement then on the other hand say they cant/wont sent the same statements

I wan't my money back!

Thanks

Paul

	Subject Access Request A Subject Access Request is a demand which you can make to any organisation to disclose any personal information which they hold on you. The right to disclosure of data is provided by the Data Protection Act. There is no time limit. The organisation is obliged to reveal everything they have about you - which you ask for - as far back as you ask for. There are very few exceptions. It does not matter whether the data is held on microfiche, in an archive, on tape, in a cardex system, in sound recordings or in screen notes. Some companies are saying that they do not have to disclose where it would be difficult to do so - "disproportionate effort". This is untrue. Disproportionate effort refers to something else under the Act. If you are seeking bank charges information then you should ask for "all data held on you" and you should make it clear that you want everything as far back as it goes. Do not be put off by excuses. Do not accept being fobbed off. It is not in your bank's interest to make full disclosure to you. This means that it is in your interests to get it. If you have not started gathering your bank charges information yet, then you should start now. There will soon be a big rush once the OFT test case has been settled. Get all of your bank account informtion as far back as possible. At least as far back as 1995. If your bank says that they don't keep data as far back as this, don't accept it. Be persistent. They've got what you need in some form or other.

[Ferru]

In light of the posts in this thread, it seems Barclaycard should train their call centre staff better. I was told yesterday that the only way I could find out what charges I had incurred would be buy buying back statements at £3 a statement. I asked whether a letter could instead be written to be, summarising how much I had paid in late payment charges, but was told that the facility did not exist to do this.

I will now send one of the letter templates given above to them. Does anyone know what address it would need to be sent to?

Thanks

Jeff

[bholmes]

Has anyone succeeded against Barclaycard yet?

[give_me_it_back]

Look in the survey results. £3570 recovered to date.

[D.Mc]

Hi There,

Just to add a bit of variety to this thread, i have also received a similar letter refusing to give me statements prior to May 2004 along with a pile of statements belonging to someone else! I can tell you everything about this fella, Account numbers, Address, current balance etc

Where do I go with this one? ..Surely must be violating some Data Protection Laws? I'm worried where mine have been sent now??

Can someone please let me know how I should continue with this one, before I call them tomorrow.

Many thanks.

[give_me_it_back]

This is shocking. wait for a MOD to come along and advise, but this definitely needs to be addressed.

[give_me_it_back]

It's obviously a huge breach of confidentiality, for which the bank have responsibilty. If it were me, I would write to the guy whose statements you have and let him know (he should then take it up with his bank), and I would let the bank you have done this.

I'm not sure about the statements... Wait until someone who has some legal knowledge advises... Of course, they are not your property, so I suspect you should forward them to the guy (recorded delivery of course - let's be responsible here ), and let him take it up with the bank, but I'd want to hang them out to dry for this blatent breach of confidentiality - and I'd make sure that everyone knew about it...

[barracad]

The statements you have received - you are duty bound to return it to them as soon as possible. Put it into an envelope addressed to the owner by name with the number of the account with a full note explaining how you got it and giving our website address. You should mark the envelope strictly private and confidential and give it to the owner's bank with a note asking them to send it to the account owner.

Also complain to the Information Commissioner and explain exactly what has happened.

[give_me_it_back]

Words of wisdom Barracad!

[D.Mc]

Thanks Barracad,

I've got no problems sending the statements back, but should i copy a page or something as evidence of receiving them for the complaint i'll be putting in?

Does this mean that he has been sent mine? They could have been sent to anyone.. It's unbelievable that they could do something like this.

[give_me_it_back]

I'd wait for Barracad to come back, but my opinion is that photocopying a statement page would leave you on very sticky ground.. It's not your property. I suspect it should be up to the original owner to start action against the bank, not you. Of it got to court, you could be called as a witness, but I suspect the judge would just show you the statement and ask if you had seen it before. You are under oath.

You should certainly demand the bank confirm where YOUR statements are, and, if the same thing has happened to you, then start action.

My opinion.,..

[D.Mc]

Ok, Thanks for the advice.

Just thought it may be a case of my word against theirs if I didnt have any evidence. My brother (Police Sargeant) is looking into it for me aswell.

I'll wait to hear from Barracad...

[give_me_it_back]

Let us know what your brother says also... I could be wrong! (It's been known before!!

[JULI99]

Barclaycard And Data Protection Laws. Don't Make Me Laugh!!!!!!!!!

Me And The Guy I Live With Have Had A Woolwich Mortgage From When Woolwich Was Owned By Woolwich. Since They Have Been Taken Over By Barclays I Now Get Sent To Me Each Month A Mortgage Statement With My Name On It And This Other Guys Barclaycard Account Number And Current Balance On. This Balance Is Added To Our Mortgage Balance And Put Under My Name In Total Owing .
We Have Tried Separately To Explain That I Do Not Owe This Balance And That To Give Out Information Like This Did Not Seem Right Given The Creditcard Companies Own Messages About Keeping This Information Secret.

Woolwich State That It Is In There T&c. Although They Were Stumped When I Pointed Out That The T&cs We Signed Did Not Make Mention Of The Fact That The Woolwich Were To Be Taken Over By Barclays Several Years Into The Future.

Both The Woolwich And Barclays Have Basically Said Thats How Things Are Done And There Was Nothing We Could Do About It. If We Were Not Happy We Could Always Take Our Business Elsewhere.

[moores2525]

Hi folks,

A long time ago I wrote to BarclayCard with a Subject Access Request (S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)), asking for the last 6 years worth of statements. They went down the usual "Microfiche" route and no matter how hard I pushed them they insisted I would have to pay £3 per statement. I sent them a Letter Before Action and still they wrote to me to say I'd have to pay £3 per statement and that details before May 2004 are not held in a relevant filing system and therefore not covered by Data Protection Act.

I put in a County Court claim against them, saying the following:

1. The Defendant is a Data Controller within the meaning of the Data Protection Act and is responsible for the processing of data of which the Claimant is a Subject.

2. The Claimant had an account number (xxxxxxxxxx [edited for your safety. BW]) ("the Account") with the Defendant which was opened on or around September 1997 and closed on or around June 2005.

3. On 10 April 2006 the Claimant sent a Subject Access Request, pursuant to Section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998 to the Defendant.

4. The Defendant has failed to comply.

5. By virtue of the Defendant's failure to comply with the Subject Access Request the Claimant has suffered damage.

6. The damage caused is:

Extra costs incurred in addition to court costs, due to the Defendants failure to comply - this includes the cost of additional correspondence and time spent preparing documents and seeking legal advice, I estimate this cost to be £120

7. The Claimant seeks an order that the Defendant do comply with the Claimant's Subject Access Request

8. Under the terms of Section 15(2) of the Data Protection Act 1998, where the Defendant contests that information requested under the Claimant's Subject Access Request is not included within the scope of Section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998, the Claimant requests that the Court inspects that information, and where it finds that the Defendant's opinion is unfounded, that it orders such information be included within the information supplied to the Claimant under the Subject Access Request.

9. Damages and costs within the discretion of the Court.



**********



They have replied to my claim with a defence, it appears to be custom written and goes like this:



1. Save as here and after expressly admitted or not admitted, the |Defendant denies each and every allegation in the Particulars of Claim as if the same was here and after set out and seperately denied.

2. It is admitted that the Claimant had a BarclayCard account with the Defendant under number ********

3. It is denied that the Defendant has failed to comply with a subject access request as alleged or at all and the Claimant is put to strict proof. The Defendant will contend that it received the Claimant's Subject Access Request by way of a letter dated 10th April 2006, together with payment of £5.00 towards the £10.00 disclosure fee. Despite the fact that the Claimant had underpaid the required fee, his file was sent to him under cover of a letter dated 19th April 2006.

4. It is denied that the Claimant has suffered damage and the Claimant is put to strict proof as to his alleged loss suffered and steps taken to mitigate his alleged loss. The Defendant will contend that, as it complied with the Claimant's Subject Access Request, there was no need for the Claimant to issue these proceedings. Therefore, the Defendant was not liable for the sum of £150.00 or any other sum. In the event, the Defendant will set off against the Claimant's claim, the sum of £5.00 in respect of the underpaid Access Request fee, by way of set off against the Claimant's claim.

5. Paragraph 6 is denied and the Defendant repeats paragraph 4 herein. The Claimant is put to strict proof as to the costs alleged of £120.00. The Defendant will contend that the sum of £120.00 is unreasonable and that the only costs recoverable to the Claimant are those set out in the Small Claims Track in CPR 27.

6. Paragraphs 7 and 8 are denied and the Defendant will contend that it has complied with the Claimant's Subject Access Request as set out in the Defendant's letter of 19th April 2006. The Defendant will contend that, if by paragraphs 7 and 8 of the claim, the Claimant is requesting copied of relevant information prior to May 2004, then upon payment of the required fee as set out in the Defendant's letter of 19th April 2006 due to the information requested not being held on a relevant filing system with the meaning of the Data Protection Act 1998.

Signed,
Adrian Charles Ruffhead: Legal Executive employed by Barclays Bank PLC



***********

Now I still don't believe that the statements before May 2004 are not covered by the Data Protection Act, and after paying them £5 for the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request), at no point did they say "you need to pay £10 and then we will provide them"....but now they are trying to use this against me! I claimed £120 - calculated that I spent 8 hours of my time writing to them because of their defiance and calculated that at the salary I get paid at work. They say they complied with my request - however I can clearly show the court that they did not - I asked for 6 year's worth of statements after all.

Can anyone give me any thoughts on this? Would I be better off now leaving the court action and paying the £3 per statement then claiming again?

thanks,
Moores2525

	County Court guidebook by Judge Patricia Pearl Follow this link to read the review of this excellent Small Claims Guidebook. This comprehensive and very accessible guide will take you through the process of suing or defending a claim. This guide will help you take control of your litigation and make you more confident about doing it yourself. Applies to England and Wales

	Small Claims kit by Lawpack Sue your bank as many times as you like with just one Small Claims kit by Lawpack. Follow this link to read the review. The kit contains everything you need: instruction manual, templates, examples, forms and a comprehensive CDRom. Applies to England and Wales

	Subject Access Request A Subject Access Request is a demand which you can make to any organisation to disclose any personal information which they hold on you. The right to disclosure of data is provided by the Data Protection Act. There is no time limit. The organisation is obliged to reveal everything they have about you - which you ask for - as far back as you ask for. There are very few exceptions. It does not matter whether the data is held on microfiche, in an archive, on tape, in a cardex system, in sound recordings or in screen notes. Some companies are saying that they do not have to disclose where it would be difficult to do so - "disproportionate effort". This is untrue. Disproportionate effort refers to something else under the Act. If you are seeking bank charges information then you should ask for "all data held on you" and you should make it clear that you want everything as far back as it goes. Do not be put off by excuses. Do not accept being fobbed off. It is not in your bank's interest to make full disclosure to you. This means that it is in your interests to get it. If you have not started gathering your bank charges information yet, then you should start now. There will soon be a big rush once the OFT test case has been settled. Get all of your bank account informtion as far back as possible. At least as far back as 1995. If your bank says that they don't keep data as far back as this, don't accept it. Be persistent. They've got what you need in some form or other.

[Bookworm]

Threads merged. Are we having a senior moment here?

Why would you want to stop the court action now? So they say they're going to defend? Good! Maybe then, we can have a decision from a judge as to whether they should comply or not! Worse case scenario, you lose, you lose your court fee, THEN you can order the statements.

2 things confuse me. Well, lots more things confuse me. But 2 things on your thread confuse me.:

In one post, you say you paid them £5, but later on, you say you did pay them £10, so which is it, and if it's £5, why? Not that it matters much now, just I'm curious.

More importantly, this:

The Defendant will contend that, if by paragraphs 7 and 8 of the claim, the Claimant is requesting copied of relevant information prior to May 2004, then upon payment of the required fee as set out in the Defendant's letter of 19th April 2006 due to the information requested not being held on a relevant filing system with the meaning of the Data Protection Act 1998.

does not make sense.

Either there's a verb missing somewhere, or they ran out of space to type their defence like they did on mine.... No matter how many times I read it, it still doesn't work. The defendant contends... what? Surely, you need to know what it is they contend?

Offer still holds for court buddy, btw!

[alanfromderby]

The only thing that worries me is the £120 damages. I think you may have a problem proving that as an actual loss, as it does not relate to loss of income.

There is a clause in the CPR which allows for legal advice in actions for an "injunction", but you would be expected to provide a breakdown of those costs, including receipts, invoices, etc.

Apart from that, their defence looks very thin on detail, and needs to be challenged vigorously. Certainly I see no explanation as to why their system should fall outside the Act, and that may be something that needs to be mentioned at AQ stage.

I would certainly be asking for them to provide details of the ACTUAL machine they use, and a detailed explanation of how information is filed. I would also ask if they have officially requested that the Information Commissioner rule on whether their system is a relevant filing system, and would they agree to that being carried out.

	County Court guidebook by Judge Patricia Pearl Follow this link to read the review of this excellent Small Claims Guidebook. This comprehensive and very accessible guide will take you through the process of suing or defending a claim. This guide will help you take control of your litigation and make you more confident about doing it yourself. Applies to England and Wales

[Bookworm]

AND not forget an explanation as to how it's not a relevant filing system under Data Protection Act, yet, if we're ready to pay £3 per statement, it is readily available...

[moores2525]

Originally Posted by Bookworm

Threads merged. Are we having a senior moment here?

Why would you want to stop the court action now? So they say they're going to defend? Good! Maybe then, we can have a decision from a judge as to whether they should comply or not! Worse case scenario, you lose, you lose your court fee, THEN you can order the statements.

2 things confuse me. Well, lots more things confuse me. But 2 things on your thread confuse me.:

In one post, you say you paid them £5, but later on, you say you did pay them £10, so which is it, and if it's £5, why? Not that it matters much now, just I'm curious.

More importantly, this: does not make sense.

Either there's a verb missing somewhere, or they ran out of space to type their defence like they did on mine.... No matter how many times I read it, it still doesn't work. The defendant contends... what? Surely, you need to know what it is they contend?

Offer still holds for court buddy, btw!

Sorry guys, my original thread was hijacked by others so I started a new one no problem though.

I paid them £5 (my bad - should of paid £10) and they sent me the rubbish computer printout with no questions asked. They certainly didn't ask for another £5 so I find it baffling they are using that against me now.

Sorry again Bookworm - the paragraph you quoted above should read:

The Defendant will contend that, if by paragraphs 7 and 8 of the claim, the Claimant is requesting copies of relevant information prior to May 2004, then upon payment of the required fee as set out in the Defendant's letter of 19th April 2006, the Defendant will supply such information. The Defendant will contend that it is entitled to charge the fee set out in its letter of 19th April 2006 due to the information requested not being held on a relevant filing system with the meaning of the Data Protection Act 1998.

I was a little bit angry with them at the time and typing fast !!!

Feel free to join me in court if you like in any action you wish to take to sort out these imbiciles!

[moores2525]

Originally Posted by alanfromderby

The only thing that worries me is the £120 damages. I think you may have a problem proving that as an actual loss, as it does not relate to loss of income.

There is a clause in the CPR which allows for legal advice in actions for an "injunction", but you would be expected to provide a breakdown of those costs, including receipts, invoices, etc.

Apart from that, their defence looks very thin on detail, and needs to be challenged vigorously. Certainly I see no explanation as to why their system should fall outside the Act, and that may be something that needs to be mentioned at AQ stage.

I would certainly be asking for them to provide details of the ACTUAL machine they use, and a detailed explanation of how information is filed. I would also ask if they have officially requested that the Information Commissioner rule on whether their system is a relevant filing system, and would they agree to that being carried out.

Hi Alan,

The £120 damages was a little tongue in cheek I'll admit. I guess the judge might rule that out immediately but it'll be interesting to see what he says. My legal advise falls strictly within the realms of Citizen's Advice, so no specific measure of damages. I thought I would attempt to bring damages for the time spent writing the letters to BarclayCard etc following their failure to comply.

I've received the court questionnaire and have two weeks to return it - I'll certainly be noting that I'll be looking for a full explanation of why their system does not fall within the grounds of the Data Protection Act and why it is not a relevant filing system. The worst thing that can happen is losing my court fee and questionnaire fee and if it actualy goes to court I'm sure the outcome will in some way aid fellow claimers in future action against BarclayCard.

	County Court guidebook by Judge Patricia Pearl Follow this link to read the review of this excellent Small Claims Guidebook. This comprehensive and very accessible guide will take you through the process of suing or defending a claim. This guide will help you take control of your litigation and make you more confident about doing it yourself. Applies to England and Wales