jad vs MBNA

[jad]

Sent off my Data Protection Act request on 8th June.

Received standard "We'll deal with it within 28 days" letter on 17 June.

Appears to have the usual Gareth Tunnicliffe contact details.

As of today (23rd) no further correspondance though.

Cheque for £10 not presented yet.

[LondonPam]

If they are doing what they have done to many people, you will received your cheque back along with a list of all your charges, not a ful Data Protection Act request. Apparently, according to a conversation I had with Gareth yesterday, they assume that the list is all people want as they know we are chasing our charges. They will supply you with a full Data Protection Act if you send it back again!

[pj41]

They've done that to me - just a statement and not the full Data Protection Act info. I've requested this from them again, but they wanted additional ID which I have supplied them with. I've just heard back from them saying that my 40 days started from when they received the ID required and not from my original request. I suspect this is a delaying tactic. Can I insist on the 40 days starting from my original request?

[jad]

Nothing received as yet.

I think I will call Gareth Tunnicliffe and find out what's happening.

[jad]

Received list of charges on 11/7 and sent my request for refund on same day.

Letter signed for on 12/7/06.

Received standard reply letter saying "we will deal with your complaint within 28 days of receipt"

This letter was signed Rachel Claridge, Office Manager.


My timetable is still ticking away, and I will be sending LBA on 26 July..if nothing heard.

	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

[surreyscouse]

good, well done, how much are you in for ?

[jad]

LBA was sent as per my timetable. Deadline for refund is 10th August...

	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

[Glenn UK]

Originally Posted by pj41

They've done that to me - just a statement and not the full Data Protection Act info. I've requested this from them again, but they wanted additional ID which I have supplied them with. I've just heard back from them saying that my 40 days started from when they received the ID required and not from my original request. I suspect this is a delaying tactic. Can I insist on the 40 days starting from my original request?

I think depends is the answer as to when you can expect the 40 days to start.

I understand they are allowed to determine if you are who you say you are, so if you have changed address or something like that then its reasonable for them to make sure of your id.

If on the other hand you have provided an address and details which they normally contact you on and there has been an ongoing relationship then as far as I can see there is no reason why the 40 days would not start when the letter was reveived by them.

Note its when the Subject Access Request is received not when they cash the cheque. They have a right to charge a fee, by sending it you are oinly making sure there is no delay in them processing you request by them having to ask for it.

If they dont bank/cash it its their problem.

I would see if anyone else comments, preferably one of the mods if your worried since I am not a legla expert only givign what to me seems a reasonable viewpoint.

HTH

Glenn

	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.

[surreyscouse]

Agree with Glenn.

Cheque received then fine and usual addresses used even better. 40 days from date of receipt if you ask me. (For what it's worth)

The Data Protection Act (the actual act) says 40 days from receip of satisfacory confirmation of ID. However, if they write at the address on record then surely that's enough, in which case they are happy to send statements to that address then surely they are happy to send any other correspondence to that address without any need for further ID. All horlicks if you ask me and they twist it for their benefit.

[gerrymc]

Hi,
When I got my statement in I discovered that they have credited my account with my cheque for the Subject Access Request. I phoned to query this, and the customer services guy eventually got a handle on why I had sent the cheque said 'I think it will cost a lot more to get all your statements' He wanted to put me through to his supervisor, but I said no, if you have received my cheque, you'll have my Subject Access Request request, so it's of no relevance to me what you decide to do with my cheque. Your 40 days are still counting down.
Any views if this was the correct thing to do?
cheers,
Gerry

	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.

[surreyscouse]

was your letter sen RD ? If so then no worries on your part. Another example of inept practice from MBNA. No probs, sit tight and see what happens after 40 days. Fromwhat you've said, sounds like nothing to me, up to you if you want to give them a shove, i'd stitch them up if it was me !

[barracad]

Yes you are quite right - if they have received your Subject Access Request then the 40 days are counting. If they decide to credit the £10 to your account then that's kind of them, but they still have to comply with your request within the 40 days.

	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.

[surreyscouse]

See ?

[gerrymc]

Thanks for the feedback. Letter wasn't sent RD, but I'm going on the basis of - 'you received the cheque that was attached to the letter, so you've got the letter'. 27 days and counting!!

[jad]

I chased up MBNA last week, and have now received a "final offer" letter from Steve Bailey.

They still claim their charges are fair, yet also tell me how they have reduced them to the OFT suggested £12......and refer me to the OFT information. Again, a standard reply, because I already brought this to their attention.

They have credited my account with £510 as final settlement, which seems a common ploy according to threads here.

The funny bit of the letter, which is obviously a template, is that they say that I am such a good customer, and value my custom....which is not possible because the account was suspended by them 3 years ago.

Rather than issuing the Moneyclaim straight away, I plan to call them on Monday and see what I can get them to do. If that fails, I plan on issuing the claim.

[jad]

I wrote back to steve Bailey on 14 August, giving him 14 days to reconsider the position.

As of today I haven't heard anything back from them. (18 days).

So, I have the claim ready to file - but will contact the Customer Advocate office first, to see if there is any last minute offer on the table.

Otherwise another MCOL will be filed !

[gbzstro]

I would go straight with the MCOL - they have had there time already and you get the extra 8%.