deleted

deleted

GOOD LUCK, you might want to PM a mod or bankfodder to make sure you've got everything in order so you don't end up paying their cost, and i'd be sh****g myself to LOL

Deleted

Unfortunately it is not likely to matter much. The Courts are very probably going to allow this, you should proceed as if they had filed on time.

You really need to tread very carefully, I am really surprised this case was allocated to the multitrack.

If there are any areas of the CPR / Costs that you need help with then please send me a P.M.

Please be careful.

Sparkie, the Courts appear to be pretty lenient with many aspects of Court

procedure where documents, defences, submissions etc are delivered late.

This may be because of the interest of fairness, or to comply with the Human Rights Act, but does seem pretty widespread. It may also reflect the fact that our post is notoriously wayward in terms of delivery times.

There is a facility in the Civil Procedures Act that allows for a defence to be delivered up to 28 days late with the agreement of the claimant. Whether

you can say that you do not agree to this late submission and so their

exchange of disclosures is inadmissible will no doubt be answered on Monday when you check with the Court.

May I too wish you good luck with the case.

Deleted

just saying hello and all the best mate.

Ill keep an eye on this (god the list is growing of subscribed threads LOL)...

Ive just done an SAR/CCA request to RBoS.

I may be wrong Sparkie but I think that banks do not have to produce bank

statements when an sar is involved, though they do have to provide details

of all charges applied to the account. They can, for a price, supply you with

statements, if you ask.

One of the examples the ICO give in their guidelines relating to the DPA, is

that data controllers have to keep records beyond 6 years "to defend legal

claims". In the light of your sar in 2005, and the involvement of the ICO,

one would have thought it encumbent upon the bank not to destroy your

records until the possibility of legal action had passed.

The other thig you should check is if they keep records of when data is

deleted and what the data was. This is to find out if data was destroyed

AFTER you submitted an sar, but BEFORE they had responded to it. Not

surprisingly, the ICO take a dim view of this practice.and so would the Court.

Deleted

The Act does not state that data should be destroyed after six years, rather

that it is kept for no longer than is necessary for that purpose which is not

the same thing.

If you think of how many customers the RBOS have, the idea that the bank

goes through and destroys cheques daily, or even weekly whenever the

six year limit is reached is frankly laughable.

Afraid I don't understand your last line "destroyed in Feb 2004".

Weird. I am 99% sure I opened my acct with them in 97. I guess we'll find out soon enough!

Deleted

Deleted

Looking for info,

 

Means exactly what it said From the period feb 1998 to feb 2004 was the six year period that the bank stated to me that in 2004 all relevant info regarding me was erased /deleted /destroyed, that is what they said when in 2005 I requested information under my SDAR, according to th RBOS that is why they sent my cheque back without any information,

ytou do not seem to see what i'm getting at in my view the information should have been kept until 2010 6 yrs FROM 2004 because I 've got the RBOS so tied up they are trying to use every trick in the book to bluff me.

 

Sp[arkie1723

Sparkie: I tend to agree with you there.I work in litigation and beleive you me I know what im talking about.When a case is closed the data cannot be destroyed until after 6 years after the case is closed so you are absoultly correct in that regard.Without going to the law books I beleive this is covered by the Limitation Act(1980) and the DPA(1998).So yes the records are covered under law until 2010.I closed a file on Friday so that file cannot be destoryed until 2013.It amazes me that the banks and finiancial instututions are flouting the law when they know darn well that they have no chance when it gets to the court room.Wilson vs First County Trust(COA 2001) is a prime example.

Looking for info,

 

Means exactly what it said From the period feb 1998 to feb 2004 was the six year period that the bank stated to me that in 2004 all relevant info regarding me was erased /deleted /destroyed, that is what they said when in 2005 I requested information under my SDAR, according to th RBOS that is why they sent my cheque back without any information,

ytou do not seem to see what i'm getting at in my view the information should have been kept until 2010 6 yrs FROM 2004 because I 've got the RBOS so tied up they are trying to use every trick in the book to bluff me.

 

Sp[arkie1723

I will be surprised if you have the details of the first 5 lines of that in writing from them since it is so patently wrong. The six year rule works backward from today, not forward from when the account was opened. Even today,

your bank should still have all of your data up to and including January 8th

2001, so to say that they have destroyed your info in 2004 already beggars

belief. What did the ICO say about that?

To shred data three years ahead of time is a serious breach of the DPA, so

it makes you wonder what they wanted to cover up that would have been

even more serious were it exposed. I would be amazed if they have deleted

anything that recent-much more likely that they are lying. And in their

disclosure statement they say that they have no correspondence before

August 2000, not some time in 2004

And to be honest, even if they had reopened your business account to post

the charges on [ and I am unaware that banks do close accounts and

leave a debit balance on it] there is nothing so serious in that action that should lead them to destroy your data up to 2004.

lookingforinfo,

By the way you try and get a copy of a cheque off the RBOS that is 6yrs 2 months old U wont get it I tried and got the answer ALL ORIGINAL CHEQUES ON YOUR ACCOUNT HAVE BEEN DESTROYED IN LINE WITH OUR CODE OF PRACTICE STATEMENT

ITS not as LAUGHABLE as you appear to believe

Sparkie 1723

Two months later is a bit different to a daily or weekly shredding.

Work it out-they have at least 2400 branches and it would probably be uneconomic for each branch to have less than 300 customers. Even assuming

each customer only had one account with a cheque book, that is still

720,000 different customers all with cheques dating back six years. I am

just about prepared to believe that they might go through them all once a

month to root out all cheques over six year old, but it is a monumental task

both timewise and costwise. It might be instrumental in your case to find

out how often it is done [since it obviously cannot be completed daily] and

whether they shred them themselves or contract out the work. And if it is

done by them how long it takes, and are all the old cheques [ie anything

older than two years] held in one place or at each branch.

Perhaps if Natweststaffmember is reading this thread, a little light could be shed on how its done.

Deleted

Just to wish you all the best.

Seems like the RBOS have got it in for you.

I am at the stage of submitting a claim via the Small Claims for the period starting Feb 02.

I received ALL the bank statements I requested, thatwas for a period of 6 years.

Tweaky

lookinforinfo,

 

Oh yes I do have thay in writing straight from a jessica howell in the RBOS business risk division conpliance unit in Edinburgh Scotland and I will post that copy on the forum later.

Sparkie1723

Well in that case they are damned if they have destroyed them [breach of

DPA fifth principle [ie data should be kept for no longer..... it still has to be

kept for the correct length of time]. And they are damned if they do present them, since it goes to their credibility. Can you believe anything they now say?

Deleted

Deleted

Delted