Paintball vs London Mortgage Company

[Paintball]

I currently have a loan with LMC (taken out 15/09/06) which includes a Single Premium amount of £4,326 in PPI added to the total amount owing on the loan. This PPI amount includes interest.

I have no recollection of actually agreeing to the PPI and have requested cancellation and reimbursement. Sterling Insurance who act as the Insurance Broker for LMC have corresponded with me and stated that I am entitled to a partial reimbursement; no actual refund, just a partial amount which is reduced from the total owing on the loan. The letter stated that this includes "incurred expenses" and "incurred risk".

I replied to Sterling requesting a breakdown of their costs to include risk and expenses and received a complaints procedure document Quel surprise!!!!

I have issued a complaint through the FSA and their reply followed on 22 February informing me that they will provide me with a response as soon as they can.

...


Razz

	Are you letting your bank keep your money Are you giving away thousands of pounds?? Many people aren't claiming all of the money they are entitled to when they make their bank charges claims. You have been forced to pay unfair bank charges. Have you forgotten that your bank has charged you inteest on those charges? If you are overdrawn and the bank owes you charges - then your overdraft is made up of charges - money which you bank owes you. Yet you are paying interest to the bank - on your own money!!! Follow this link to see the discussions on this. You might even double th size of your claim.

[hellhasnofury]

Originally Posted by Paintball

I currently have a loan with LMC (taken out 15/0/06) which includes a Single Premium amount of £4,326 in PPI which is added to the total amount owing on the loan. This PPI amount includes interest.

I have no recollection of actually agreeing to the PPI and have requested cancellation and reimbursement. Sterling Insurance who act as the Insurance Broker for LMC have corresponded with me and stated that I am entitled to a partial reimbursement; no actual refund, just a partial amount which is reduced from the total owing on the loan. The letter stated that this includes "incurred expenses" and "incurred risk".

I replied to Sterling requesting a breakdown of their costs to include risk and expenses and received a complaints procedure document Quel surprise!!!!

I have issued a complaint through the FSA and their reply followed on 22 February informing me that they will provide me with a response as soon as they can.

...


Razz

Hello Paintball

Just a quick question, have you referred a complaint through the FSA or the FOS, or both . With regards to the partial re-imbursement. They are refunding the unpaid ppi and interest into the balance of the loan, therefore reducing it. The part of the ppi and interest you have paid, should be returned to you, with contractual interest.

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

	Are you letting your bank keep your money Are you giving away thousands of pounds?? Many people aren't claiming all of the money they are entitled to when they make their bank charges claims. You have been forced to pay unfair bank charges. Have you forgotten that your bank has charged you inteest on those charges? If you are overdrawn and the bank owes you charges - then your overdraft is made up of charges - money which you bank owes you. Yet you are paying interest to the bank - on your own money!!! Follow this link to see the discussions on this. You might even double th size of your claim.

[Paintball]

Hi Helly..

Through the Financial Ombudsman Service complaints procedure. I understand what they have refunded to the balance of the loan, and am concerned now about the lack of reimbursement for the amount paid plus interest.

I can wait until the FOS makes its decision and gets back to me (hmm hmm, waiting patiently ) or I can procede down the LBA and N1 route as I did with my Capital Bank PPI claim (blatant mis-selling to a student!!)
and claim/argue mis-selling ...

Painty x

	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

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

	Are you letting your bank keep your money Are you giving away thousands of pounds?? Many people aren't claiming all of the money they are entitled to when they make their bank charges claims. You have been forced to pay unfair bank charges. Have you forgotten that your bank has charged you inteest on those charges? If you are overdrawn and the bank owes you charges - then your overdraft is made up of charges - money which you bank owes you. Yet you are paying interest to the bank - on your own money!!! Follow this link to see the discussions on this. You might even double th size of your claim.

[hellhasnofury]

Originally Posted by Paintball

Hi Helly..

Through the Financial Ombudsman Service complaints procedure. I understand what they have refunded to the balance of the loan, and am concerned now about the lack of reimbursement for the amount paid plus interest.

I can wait until the FOS makes its decision and gets back to me (hmm hmm, waiting patiently ) or I can procede down the LBA and N1 route as I did with my Capital Bank PPI claim (blatant mis-selling to a student!!)
and claim/argue mis-selling ...

Painty x

Hello Painty

If you have put a complaint to the Fos they will investigate thoroughly, although I do believe they are rather busy, due to the consumer revolt They do take time, but I also believe that they are upholding 80% of mis-sold ppi complaints.

If you do the court route, this can also that some time, so its your call really.

I wish you good luck in your decision

Keep us posted

	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

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

	Are you letting your bank keep your money Are you giving away thousands of pounds?? Many people aren't claiming all of the money they are entitled to when they make their bank charges claims. You have been forced to pay unfair bank charges. Have you forgotten that your bank has charged you inteest on those charges? If you are overdrawn and the bank owes you charges - then your overdraft is made up of charges - money which you bank owes you. Yet you are paying interest to the bank - on your own money!!! Follow this link to see the discussions on this. You might even double th size of your claim.

[Paintball]

Originally Posted by hellhasnofury

Hello Painty

If you have put a complaint to the Fos they will investigate thoroughly, although I do believe they are rather busy, due to the consumer revolt They do take time, but I also believe that they are upholding 80% of mis-sold ppi complaints.

If you do the court route, this can also that some time, so its your call really.

I wish you good luck in your decision

Keep us posted

Thanks for the support ... I must admit I'm a bit of a 'Claim Whore'!! I usually proceed straight to the N1 route and no messing about, but on this occasion thought I'd give the old FOS a chance to do their bit on my behalf!

However, I'm twitching badly at the mo, partly because I've handed control over to another party and have to wait for their decision and don't have access to every stage of the process and partly a general sense of impatience!!

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

[Paintball]

As part of the FOS investigation process (lengthy!!) LMC have abdicated all responsibility for the selling of the PPI, referring me instead to the broker which was Oryen.

I have already received a partial reimbursement of the PPI which was less than half of the Single Premium sum added to the loan; £2119.74 from a total £4326.00 LMC have offset this amount against my monthly loan payments and have not taken any loan payments since December 2007.

They did not advise me that this was what they were going to do. I received no correspondence from them and only discovered this 'method' when I called them. As I stated to the Customer Services rep, they have done this "without my knowledge or consent" ...

I still have to decide whether I will be going for the full mis-selling of PPI and claiming this from Oryen in which case, I would be claiming the rest of the full amount not reimbursed by LMC.

Any suggestions anyone?



BTW, have almost won my case against HBOS (sued as Capital Bank) for return of mis-sold PPI, Judgment issued last week for full payment.

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

[Paintball]

Bump ...

[Paintball]

Bumpety bump ... anyone there?

[nicho1120]

i am in a similar situation to yourself. I wrote to sterling to ask them to cancel the single premium policy that was taken out with my initial loan. they sent me a cheque for 40% of the single premium. I wrote a letter to them to ask how they had arrived at the figure and they sent me a breakdown of what costs were incurred e.t.c. I don't believe that 40 % is a fair amount considering that I will be paying this ppi for the duration of the loan with interest added. I am not sure really what to do now. I have written to the broker that set the loan up and asked for Data Protection Act. I don't believe that i was told that the ppi only covered me for 3 years. Not received the info yet and the 40 days are near. Will get back to you when i have more info

	Are you letting your bank keep your money Are you giving away thousands of pounds?? Many people aren't claiming all of the money they are entitled to when they make their bank charges claims. You have been forced to pay unfair bank charges. Have you forgotten that your bank has charged you inteest on those charges? If you are overdrawn and the bank owes you charges - then your overdraft is made up of charges - money which you bank owes you. Yet you are paying interest to the bank - on your own money!!! Follow this link to see the discussions on this. You might even double th size of your claim.

[Paintball]

Nicho, you are a star Thanks for this response, it's exactly what has happened to me except that the T&C's for the PPI that I finally received after the FOS's intervention state that I'm entitled to 49% reimbursement.

However, I'm still unhappy with this for the reasons you state in your message and don't think it's fair that I'm still paying the premium in my monthly amount which includes interest. What I feel I need to do is work out what the interest is and how much that would add to the amount 'reimbursed'.

Watch this space and I'll be watching yours ...

P x

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

	Are you letting your bank keep your money Are you giving away thousands of pounds?? Many people aren't claiming all of the money they are entitled to when they make their bank charges claims. You have been forced to pay unfair bank charges. Have you forgotten that your bank has charged you inteest on those charges? If you are overdrawn and the bank owes you charges - then your overdraft is made up of charges - money which you bank owes you. Yet you are paying interest to the bank - on your own money!!! Follow this link to see the discussions on this. You might even double th size of your claim.

[nicho1120]

sterling gave me a breakdown on how they had arrived to the 40% figure. I am not sure whether it is worth going to the fos and complaining about the amount received.

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

[Paintball]

I've done that Nicho but they're stalling so my next step is to send a Subject Access Request to LMC and then claim the lot back based on mis-selling. I will need to claim it back from the broker, Oryen.

A tad complicated ...


Razz

	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.

[nicho1120]

shouldnt you be sending the Subject Access Request to your broker then ???

	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.

[Paintball]

Originally Posted by nicho1120

i am in a similar situation to yourself. I wrote to sterling to ask them to cancel the single premium policy that was taken out with my initial loan. they sent me a cheque for 40% of the single premium. I wrote a letter to them to ask how they had arrived at the figure and they sent me a breakdown of what costs were incurred e.t.c. I don't believe that 40 % is a fair amount considering that I will be paying this ppi for the duration of the loan with interest added. I am not sure really what to do now. I have written to the broker that set the loan up and asked for Data Protection Act. I don't believe that i was told that the ppi only covered me for 3 years. Not received the info yet and the 40 days are near. Will get back to you when i have more info

I'm reviving my claim after a period of confusion with it. Noted your comments Nicho which mirror my own circumstances ...

Originally Posted by nicho1120

shouldnt you be sending the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) to your broker then ???

Yes, I should Nicho I have finally unearthed the original paperwork for the loan.

It was brokered by Magic Loans and I'm sending the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) today. I refuse to accept the 40% refund, was mis-sold PPI in the first place as Magic Loans did not follow FSA selling guidelines and Banking Code of good practice and did NOT treat me fairly, and I was not told that I would be paying the premium and interest for the duration of the loan once the three year period of the cover was ended. The latter amounts to concealment at the very least and misrepresentation at worst ...


The battle continues

	The Banking Code Follow this link to read the Banking Code in full. Ofen ignored by its subscribers, half-heartedly monitored and poorly enforced

	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.

	Are you letting your bank keep your money Are you giving away thousands of pounds?? Many people aren't claiming all of the money they are entitled to when they make their bank charges claims. You have been forced to pay unfair bank charges. Have you forgotten that your bank has charged you inteest on those charges? If you are overdrawn and the bank owes you charges - then your overdraft is made up of charges - money which you bank owes you. Yet you are paying interest to the bank - on your own money!!! Follow this link to see the discussions on this. You might even double th size of your claim.

[Paintball]

Received today the most arrogant response from Magic Loans regarding my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request).

To quote from the letter: "Our records show that you made a previous complaint about the sale of PPI and a comprehensive reply finding your complaint not to be upheld was issued to you on 25 February by my colleague X. Within this reply, it was clearly stated that you had a period of six months [...] to refer your complaint to the FOS if you were unhappy with the decision. You did not do so and [...] your complaint became time-barred and would not be accepted or investigated by the FOS if you escalated it to them now.

As a consequence of this there is no case to answer regarding the sale of PPI. Indeed, my colleague found there was no case to answer in the first instance. As your request under the Data Protection Act 1998 was clearly stated a directly linked to the sale of PPI, there is no reason to involve you in the expense of the request and I therefore enclose your cheque [...] "

Firstly, I never received a letter from Magic Loans in February and I have never contacted them before my Subject Access Request in September. I have always dealt with Sterling Insurance, the underwriter.

Today I called the FOS who began their investigation of the complaint in February for me and who are baffled by this response, in particular the time-barring, informing me that they'll be happy to continue investigating it on my behalf. The chap was also baffled by the refusal to comply with my Subject Access Request!!

I have informed the chap who sent the letter that his reponse is arrogant, that the case is NOT closed and that I have a legal right to the info they hold on me regardless of whether it relates to a complaint or any other issue.

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

	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.

[alanalana]

Hello Painty,

Received today the most arrogant response from Magic Loans regarding my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request).

To quote from the letter: "Our records show that you made a previous complaint about the sale of PPI and a comprehensive reply finding your complaint not to be upheld was issued to you on 25 February by my colleague X. Within this reply, it was clearly stated that you had a period of six months [...] to refer your complaint to the FOS if you were unhappy with the decision. You did not do so and [...] your complaint became time-barred and would not be accepted or investigated by the FOS if you escalated it to them now.

As a consequence of this there is no case to answer regarding the sale of PPI. Indeed, my colleague found there was no case to answer in the first instance. As your request under the Data Protection Act 1998 was clearly stated a directly linked to the sale of PPI, there is no reason to involve you in the expense of the request and I therefore enclose your cheque [...] " As you say most arrogant and condescending.


Assuming a tone of superiority, or a patronizing attitude
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/condescending

Firstly, I never received a letter from Magic Loans in February and I have never contacted them before my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) in September. I have always dealt with Sterling Insurance, the underwriter.

Today I called the FOS who began their investigation of the complaint in February for me and who are baffled by this response, in particular the time-barring, informing me that they'll be happy to continue investigating it on my behalf. The chap was also baffled by the refusal to comply with my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)!! And so another letter goes off to the Information Commissioners Office for Magic Loans failing to comply with the Data Protection Act 1998.

I have informed the chap who sent the letter that his reponse is arrogant, that the case is NOT closed and that I have a legal right to the info they hold on me regardless of whether it relates to a complaint or any other issue.

True fighting spirit as ever. Their letter is not funny but your response did make me smile

aa

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

	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.

[Paintball]

aa I was stottin' this morning when I read that letter. But chuckling afte I spoke to the nice young man at th FOS and definitely now

Now, in relation to your comment about another letter going off the the Information Commissioners Office about Magic Loans failing to comply with a Subject Access Request, can you direct me to another complaint for this co? Save me a bit of time trawling but happy to try anyway

Cheers

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

	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.

[hellhasnofury]

Hello Painty,

Well I never. the arrogance of this company, but I am sure you will reply with a suitable response pointing out the error of their ways

As you know Painty, It really is not up to them whether to respond, or not, to your legal request for information By law they must comply

I am sure that you will report them to the information commissioners office as to their conduct

Is it not great when they give themselves more rope to hang themselves.

Why are the being so defensive I wonder Is there something in your S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) that they do not want you to see

	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.

[alanalana]

Hello Painty,

As a consequence of this there is no case to answer regarding the sale of PPI. Indeed, my colleague found there was no case to answer in the first instance. As your request under the Data Protection Act 1998 was clearly stated a directly linked to the sale of PPI, there is no reason to involve you in the expense of the request and I therefore enclose your cheque [...] " As you say most arrogant and condescending.


Assuming a tone of superiority, or a patronizing attitude
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/condescending

I have been thinking about this bit of my post and have to post again to say I was wrong to put in the wiktionary result of cendescending as to do that was in itself condescending.

Sorry

I will look for a suitable complain for you to use for the Information Commissioners Office and post soon

aa

[alanalana]

Here you go Painty,

this was part of my response to a similar situation just fill in the relevant bits for your dates etc and use what you can. Long as my posts always are.

I would wish to point out that the information requested in my original letter Subject Access Request (S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)) dated xxxxxxxxx has not been forthcoming.
By law under the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 Section 7 sub section (1) ( c ) ( i ) and (ii) you are required to communicate to me in an intelligible form the information as requested within the requirements of the Act section 7 (2) (a) and (b), which as the data subject I have met.


I now must insist that you provide the following for ALL accounts or associated accounts that I as a Data Subject have held with your organization:

Full copies of all contracts which you believe exist or have existed between myself and your organization, including true copies of any documents you hold in support of the same.
A complete list of all transactions or statements relating to ALL of my Loan Accounts including all details of payment protection insurance premiums applicable to those accounts with your organization.

When I insist on the provision of all details, I take that to include all data applicable to me as a Data subject including the data on payment protection insurance (PPI) including the Terms and Conditions applicable to the insurance applied to the loans.

Copies of all documents which include any of my personal information including copies of any contracts or invoices, emails or computer records, or letters containing my personal information, or any records which relate to this information.

Full copies or transcripts of any correspondence in postal, email or any other format which you have entered into with any individual, organization or third party which contains my personal or financial information, or which pertains to me.

If you are then unable to trace the information on these loans then I will require the following action to be taken by your organisation.

Where any previous information or records held have been deleted or disposed of, the methods used to do so, including dates, certificates or references confirming details of destruction. Where you are unable to provide such certificates, please provide a declaration, signed by an authorised officer (preferably the Data Controller) of your company, confirming the dates and methods of destruction of this data.

Full hard copy print outs of my personal or financial information, held in a digital, magnetic or any other format which is held in any archives, backups or other storage devices / locations.”
To date I have not received this full information. I await the following:
1. Full details of PPI including the terms and conditions as applicable to the loans as detailed in my first request.
2. Full transcripts of all telephone conversations that have been recorded between your organisation and myself.
3. Full copies of all credit agreements and contracts between Magic Loans and myself.
4. Full copies of any and all postal or email correspondence.

If there is no information available then I will require written confirmation of this together with as stated before full details on your methods of erasure, disposal or destruction signed by an authorised officer of your company.

Failure to respond to this second request in a fully comprehensive and satisfactory manner within 14 days, will result in the submission of a formal complaint to the Information Commissioners Office detailing your failure to comply with the Data Protection Act 1998. Which is a Legal Statute within the Law.

You can chop and change to suit their response to you but the Data Protection Act Sections do apply.

Data Protection Act 1998 (c. 29)

You can confirm through this link.

aa
PS
have been a bit repetitive in some areas but it might get the message across if they read twice what you require.