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 have other claims running, with Lloyds TSB. Starting a new thread here as I have just sent a Data Protection Act Subject access request to Hitachi Capital Consumer Finance.
Contact address:
Hitachi Capital Consumer Finance
City Exchange
Albion Street
Leeds
West Yorkshire
LS1 5ES
I wish you all a speedy recovery of everything the law says you are entitled to.
Opinions / advice of Bean are independent, informal, without prejudice, without liability, not CAG endorsed. If in doubt, ask a qualified professional.
Unfortunately i'm not an expert in any given field legally and my advice and that of the Consumer Action Group and the Bank Action Group is given without prejudice and without liability so please if in any doubt whatsoever seek help from an insured qualified professional. Contents of my posts are purely my own personal opinions and not condoned or endorsed in any way, shape or form by CAG. Thank you!
Opinions / advice of Bean are independent, informal, without prejudice, without liability, not CAG endorsed. If in doubt, ask a qualified professional.
Hi there have you had a response yet? I sent mine a couple of days after you and have heard diddly squat. Was considering sending them a 'nudge' letter. This company is the worst one I have dealt with on everything so far, ie customer service, so I am fully expecting the same treatment for this process!
FD £691.50 SETTLED IN FULL £691.50 FD CREDIT CARD £75, SETTLED IN FULL £75 MBNA CREDIT CARD £1784 SETTLED IN FULL BARCLAYCARD . . .£500 BACK SO FAR . . NOW OFF TO COURT FOR MY OTHER £1200
PLEASE BE AWARE . . .MY OPINION IS JUST THAT . . IF IN DOUBT SEEK QUALIFIED LEGAL ADVICE x
Opinions / advice of Bean are independent, informal, without prejudice, without liability, not CAG endorsed. If in doubt, ask a qualified professional.
This company is appauling - they put a CIFAS warning (fraud) on my account - wrongly I may add as they had some wrong details about me. Now they refuse to remove it and won't issue me with a final response letter so I can take it to the CIFAS body themselves - I hope you manage to bleed them for every penny Good luck
This company is appauling - they put a CIFAS warning (fraud) on my account - wrongly I may add as they had some wrong details about me. Now they refuse to remove it and won't issue me with a final response letter so I can take it to the CIFAS body themselves...
I hope you quickly get your account/credit register back to a true and accurate record of what it should be. I may be wrong, but I think the content of this site will ultimately expand to take on issues of misrepresentation/defamation/etc., arising from unlawful penalty charges, etc.
Originally Posted by blacksheep1979
...- I hope you manage to bleed them for every penny Good luck
No question of bleeding anybody. It is my money, the charges are unlawful, so I want it back.
Opinions / advice of Bean are independent, informal, without prejudice, without liability, not CAG endorsed. If in doubt, ask a qualified professional.
Thanks blacksheep1979, it's time the nonsense of these charges ended. The costs of running a bank should be proportioned appropriately, not heavily loaded onto one area.
Opinions / advice of Bean are independent, informal, without prejudice, without liability, not CAG endorsed. If in doubt, ask a qualified professional.
Data Protection Act Subject access request sent 8 July 2006 by recorded post, delivered 11 July 2006.
I phoned 14 August 2006 to prompt them to respond as it is in neither of our interests for them not to comply with the 40-day compliance period of the Act.
No data to date so I phoned again to find out what's going on. They are looking into it, to see whether my request has been processed. By my reckoning they had till yesterday (20 August 2006) to respond.
Opinions / advice of Bean are independent, informal, without prejudice, without liability, not CAG endorsed. If in doubt, ask a qualified professional.
Opinions / advice of Bean are independent, informal, without prejudice, without liability, not CAG endorsed. If in doubt, ask a qualified professional.
they are messing me around as well . . I sent the non compliance letter giving them 7 days or else so hopefully we will both get a response this week . . what an awful company
FD £691.50 SETTLED IN FULL £691.50 FD CREDIT CARD £75, SETTLED IN FULL £75 MBNA CREDIT CARD £1784 SETTLED IN FULL BARCLAYCARD . . .£500 BACK SO FAR . . NOW OFF TO COURT FOR MY OTHER £1200
PLEASE BE AWARE . . .MY OPINION IS JUST THAT . . IF IN DOUBT SEEK QUALIFIED LEGAL ADVICE x
FD £691.50 SETTLED IN FULL £691.50 FD CREDIT CARD £75, SETTLED IN FULL £75 MBNA CREDIT CARD £1784 SETTLED IN FULL BARCLAYCARD . . .£500 BACK SO FAR . . NOW OFF TO COURT FOR MY OTHER £1200
PLEASE BE AWARE . . .MY OPINION IS JUST THAT . . IF IN DOUBT SEEK QUALIFIED LEGAL ADVICE x
I have just phoned them and they tell me that my statements were posted on Friday 18 August 2006 (as they said previously) but have not have arrived. They will re-order the statements and send to me.
I will send them the 7-day letter to encourage them to send my data.
Opinions / advice of Bean are independent, informal, without prejudice, without liability, not CAG endorsed. If in doubt, ask a qualified professional.
I have sent a letter before action regarding non-compliance with Data Protection Act Subject access request. It is based on a bank template letter but also covers reference information that I will find useful when making a complaint:
"Hitachi Capital Consumer Finance City Exchange Albion Street Leeds West Yorkshire LS1 5ES
7 September 2006
LETTER BEFORE ACTION Section 7 – Data Protection Act 1998
Dear Sir/Madam
AGREEMENT NUMBER: *********
You have failed to comply with my Data Protection Act Subject access request dated 8 July 2006 which was sent by recorded post and received by you on 11 July 2006.
I demand that you comply with my Data Protection Act Subject Access Request. If you do not comply within the next 7 days, i.e. my data to be received my me by Saturday 16 September 2006, I shall without any further notice seek a Court order obliging you to do so together with damages at the discretion of the Court.
I prompted you for a response by telephoning you for the first time (on 08708-508-116) on 14 August 2006 when J* told me that he would e-mail the relevant person to contact me. No-one called me.
I prompted you for a response by telephoning you for a second time (on 08708-508-116) on 21 August 2006 and was told that someone would phone me back about this.
As I had not received a phone call from you during that day, I phoned for the third time and at 16:50 was told by J* that my statements had been sent out on Friday 18 August 2006. I did not believe it was true that my statements had been sent out on Friday 18 August 2006, but decided to give you the benefit of the doubt by waiting at least 5 days for the postal service to deliver.
I was away for approximately ** days around the end of August 2006 and as I expected, on my return found that no statements had arrived in my absence.
I phoned for a fourth time (on 08708-508-116) at 10:00 on Monday 4 September 2006 to tell you that my data had not arrived. R* said that he would re-order my information and have it sent to me first class. Based on past performance, I did not believe this would arrive promptly and have unfortunately been proved correct. Hence this letter.
Incidentally, on each of the four occasions I telephoned, I had to wait for a period of ten to twenty minutes listening to your automated phone messages before a real person spoke to me. Thankfully I am not now a customer of Hitachi Capital Consumer Finance, but regardless, I still find this poor level of performance on handling telephone calls to be unacceptable.
I have posted thousands upon thousands of items by Royal Mail during my lifetime. To my knowledge, I can count on one hand the number of items that did not arrive at their intended destination so I am highly sceptical of your claim that you sent my data on Friday 18 August 2006.
IF you sent my data on Friday 18 August 2006, you were sending it 38 days after my Data Protection Act Subject Access Request, very close to the statutory 40 day limit, and should not have relied on regular first class post. You should have used recorded post, as I have for all my correspondence with you.
This raises two important issues:
That even now, 58 days after my Data Protection Act Subject Act Request arrived at your office I still do not have my data.
That either you are lying to me about sending my data OR that the data which you say you sent on Friday 18 August 2006 is lost somewhere in the postal system and therefore potentially open to misuse by any unknown party for purposes such as identity fraud. Exactly how have you demonstrated data protection here?
At my earliest convenience, I shall be contacting the Information Commissioner about this matter.
I also ask that you notify me in writing with a contact name, telephone number, e-mail address, and postal address for your complaints department so that I may fully inform them of this matter.
I ask you to ensure that my data is sent to me in packaging sufficient to protect it in transit. Additionally, I recommend that you use recorded post to record and guarantee delivery.
Opinions / advice of Bean are independent, informal, without prejudice, without liability, not CAG endorsed. If in doubt, ask a qualified professional.
Non-compliance with Data Protection Act , i.e. 7-day letter before action, was sent first class by 'signed for' post last Thursday, 7 September 2006, but online track and trace still does not show it as delivered.
Opinions / advice of Bean are independent, informal, without prejudice, without liability, not CAG endorsed. If in doubt, ask a qualified professional.
Non-compliance with Data Protection Act , i.e. 7-day letter before action, was sent first class by 'signed for' post last Thursday, 7 September 2006, but online track and trace still does not show it as delivered.
Online Track & Trace still not showing as delivered, but I phoned Hitachi Capital to ask if they had progressed this regardless and was told that they received my 7-day letter yesterday, 13 September 2006.
I was told my data will be sent by first class recorded delivery today.
Opinions / advice of Bean are independent, informal, without prejudice, without liability, not CAG endorsed. If in doubt, ask a qualified professional.
Opinions / advice of Bean are independent, informal, without prejudice, without liability, not CAG endorsed. If in doubt, ask a qualified professional.
Opinions / advice of Bean are independent, informal, without prejudice, without liability, not CAG endorsed. If in doubt, ask a qualified professional.
If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.Private message facilities are offered for users to communicate issues that are/or could be seen to be inappropriate for posting on the main forum.Site rules explain this in more detail.If you are approached by private message with a view to asking you to visit another website,please inform the site team via the report icon. Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed. Donations help CAG to help YOU Click here