Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
I started the long Haul against Barclaycard on 18th August 2007, by sending the 1st letter [S.A.R - (Subject access request) request] wherein I requested a complete record of the account information for which I have just received a reply.
It makes for interesting reading.
The missive claimns in the 2nd Paragraph says that Statements which are pre-2004 held on microfice does not fall under the definintion of "relevant filing system" which is quite correct, if one is in a time warp and looking at the act pre 2004/2005, at which point ALL stored records then came under the act which it clearly states. Also of interest is their claim in the same paragraph that they are not bound by said act to comply.
Last paragraph they say as a gesture of good will & in light of the 'proposed' change to the Act they are enclosing account statements, still claiming that this request does not fall under the act.
Last sentance they claim that the supplied information is all that they hold.
Yeah Right.
First of all, anyone who was involved in the implementation of the act [DTI or what is now known as BERR after Gordie split it in 3 parts] knew and had received detailed advice that the act would cover ALL records from the end of 2004/mid 2005 [it was probably earlier, the training course I attended was quite a few years back] this negates their assertion as detailed above that the act does not cover this request and has been in place for over 2 years.
Unfortunately for Barcleycard, despite paying off the outstanding balance back in 2005, I did keep a chunk of the statements. I will be comparing what they have supplied, plus pointing out that I requested ALL account statements from the start of the account with themselves, if they cannot prove they destroyed said account details it must be assumed account details still exist and I require them - or else it's Breech time, [Monopoly speak] do not pass Go, Pay £400 and go straight to Jail. I feel a knife sharpening exercise is going to be needed on these people.
I will be phoning/writing to BarclayCard with the following:
Dear Sir/Madam
I note your reply to my Subject access request dated 7th September 2007. I further note that in your reply that you are unable to supply the requested information pre-2004 as it does not exist, and claim that the act does not cover access to data held on Microfice, despite enclosing some but not all requested information as I claerly requested.
Due to the correspondence I have seen, it is clear that you are well aware that your assertions on the coverage of the act is incorrect, which has led to you being forced via reported Breeches to the Information Commisionar office and the courts to comply fully in a timly and open manner which you have failed to do in the past in those cases.
The period of time during which you are required to supply the requested information is up on the 27th September 2007, I require a full accounting as to the status of the information I have requested from my SAR request in the form of a "Statement of Truth" from the Manager of of Barcleycard Customer Services section and also the Senior Director of Barcleycard Customer Services Division that this information is in fact not retrievable and has been destroyed by yourselves or affilaited organisations, also an accounting as to why I as the customer was not informed of this fact at the time of the alledged destruction when yourselves knew that such an action was against the wishes of the Act.
Non-receipt of the said Statement of Truth by the 27th September 2007, will automatically trigger action on my part in the form of a Registering of a Breech of the Act with the Information Commisionar office, and also the start of proceedings against yourselves in the courts to force compliance and claiming of compensation due to your shoddy behaviour and lack of transparency in your dealings with myself on this matter. If needed Compensation will also be sought if it turns out the information was destroyed without my knowledge.
All comunnications on this matter will of course be copied to the Information Commisionar Office if I must seek their help on this matter.
I look forward to your reply on this matter.
Regards
blah blah blah
I think the above will leave BarclayCard with no room to wriggle off the hook. Let the games begin
If anyone can offer advice I would welcome it.
Laters
Gazza01
1st S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Request Sent 18th August 2007
1st SAR Request Response from Barclaycard 8th September 2007
1st SAR Request My Response to Barcleycard 10th September 2007
1st SAR Request 40 day limit due date 27th Sepember 2007
I won't be fobbed off mate - what have I got to loose? Nothing. I'm unemployed [though that thankfully might be coming to an end], & have no money. Plus, I must admit I am enjoying this, It's been a while since I have had to demonstrate that messing with someone who doesn't care about the outcome one way or the other, and is not afraid of authority when they start treading on his toes - there is a reason why senior directors in the civil service feared me, as they learnt to their cost! - is a person to be feared.
Just a quick update on a interesting conversation I just had which I feel will provide amusement for everyone.
One knows that BarclayCard boasts about its customer service, so how about this, received a letter from them, but the contact number is for the Call Centre in India!!! Tell the operator that I wish to be transfered to the UK and the person named on the letter and guess what? I get transfered to another person, female this time in India!! Explain what had happened and that I needed to speak to the person based here in the UK and lo-and-behold I get through to the office. The person concerned is out on A/L this week and spoke to a for a change, a helpful sounding person in the correspondence section, pointed out that:
a] will not accept internal procedures but strictly following timescales as laid out in Freedom of Information Act act
b] fact that quoted number on letter is for a call centre in India [she's going to point out to management that that is a quick way of winding people up but I suspect nothing will change on that front]
c] no contract sent as clearly asked for
d] microfiched statment which was enclosed which negates argument unable to supply them
e] from phrasing of letter will not/is unable to supply requested information - i.e. no wording to say further requested information would be sent, which means they are in breech
f] have until 27th to comply & clock is ticking.
Oh and don't bother inputting your account number if your account is closed like mine, as that is why I was put through to India I suspect.
Off in an hour to send my reply by registered post to this bunch of wollies.
Gazz01 vs Barclaycard
) request] wherein I requested a complete record of the account information for which I have just received a reply.
& in light of the 'proposed' change to the Act they are enclosing account statements, still claiming that this request does not fall under the act.
Reply With Quote
