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.
Kitty B v's Egg - Advice needed. They returned my cheque :(
Hi,
I sent off my S.A.R as per the template to Egg on the 23rd April.
It was delivered on the 25th of April.
Today I recieved a letter from Egg (dated May 1st), complete with my cheque back with a stamp on the back of it with the date 26/04/07.
It has a form for me to fill in saying
"Thank you for your recent request for information. There are three ways we can provide this to you. Please return the form and return it. Once we have received the completed form and cheque we'll process it as soon as we can"
Then 3 options
1. A complete list of transactions on my account including charges - £5
(You have to supply account numbers and as this is an old account I don't have them)
2. Copies of statements at £2 per statement up to a maximum of £10.
3. A complete Subject access request. We'll send you a pack, you'll need to fill out a form and send in a cheque after you've received the pack and then we have 40 days.
I'm really confused. My letter was the Subject access request template, and they had the cheque so I'm unsure why they've returned it to me, and it now delays the start of the 4o days.
Re: Kitty B v's Egg - Advice needed. They returned my cheque :(
Hi Kitty,
I sent my SAR off on the same day as you, and received exactly the same thing in the post this morning! Returned cheque, yet they say in the form that they require a £10 fee! What a cheek.
I don't know if this is the right way to go, but I plan on sending the form back, with a copy of my passport as ID, with a letter reminding them that I made a full request under the Data Protection Act in my original letter, enclosing another cheque, and reminding them that their 40 days to comply began when they received my letter on 25th April, and that if they don't comply I'll file a claim for non-compliance! Maybe you should do the same, although I'm quite new to this so someone may be along with some better advice soon.
Re: Kitty B v's Egg - Advice needed. They returned my cheque :(
They have not refused to comply with your SAR, they have asked you to confirm your choice from 3:
(3) Do you really require SAR for 10 quid -- 1-inch full bundle of papers as required by law, EVERYTHING they hold on you.
(2) All statements for 10 quid, but less material than SAR.
(1) Just a one-page(?) manual transcription of all(?) your charges for 5 quid.
This appears to be a new Egg tactic started within the last few weeks. Option 1 saves £5, but such a list is unlikely to show the Contractual interest prevailing at the time of the charge. Nor will it show the regular flucutations of monthly C.I. rate. Without these you cannot accurately reconstruct the debit interest you suffered, unlawfully, assuming your account was in debit balance all the time. If you pursue C.I. claim and Egg can prove at the trial your figures are inaccurate, not sure if Egg barrister will actually attend court, and have your entire claim thrown out due to factual provable inaccuracy.
Also for Option 1 you have no way of knowing if any charge has been "accidentally" missed out from the manual short list.
So I believe you have £5 to lose and much to gain, by confirming you want the full monty. As for the delay to your 40-day deadline clock, probably not worth fighting, but all other SAR requestors could foil this time-wasting by saying upfront, that they want the full monty, not the half monty or quarter monty. Any move which puts Egg on the back foot, puts you on the front foot.
Re: Kitty B v's Egg - Advice needed. They returned my cheque :(
Thank you for the reply.
Definitely worth noting for anyone starting out against Egg.
Just slightly concerned that have to send this form back, wait for them to send a SAR pack back from Egg in reply to this, then send off the request and the cheque before I can start the 40 day timescale.
But as you so rightly point out, there's much to gain, so I'll get form back in the post.
Re: Kitty B v's Egg - Advice needed. They returned my cheque :(
Sorry if I'm butting in on your thread here Kitty, just wanted to clear up what Mistermind has said!
If we both sent off the template SAR letter, requesting all information Egg hold on us, and enclosing a cheque for £10, then do the 40 days start from the date they received that letter, or do they begin from when Egg receive this form? In the form we have both received (I presume that they are carbon copies), it says that if we request the 3rd option (which we already did with our first letter!), we will be sent out an 'information pack' basically to advise us how to do this. It also says that they will require identification, and a £10 fee will be charged.
I am assuming that this is a delaying tactic by Egg, but are they able to do this? Is my plan to send the form back along with a reminder that the 40 days began from the date they first received my full request, AND that a cheque was sent with the original request ok or do Egg have more leeway here than I think they do?
Re: Kitty B v's Egg - Advice needed. They returned my cheque :(
Hi JenQuack84
I don't know enough about the DPA to know if the clock won't have started ticking on the 40 days if they've returned the cheques to us.
It really just has to be a delaying tatic, because the letters are very clear in our requests.
It's daft, I'm already wondering if I should forget about this at the first hurdle!
Re: Kitty B v's Egg - Advice needed. They returned my cheque :(
Thank you MM. It's my first try at this, and the whole thing makes me nervous, but even in that list it's apparent how very different every case is and I just need to crack on.
Bizarrely, having checked my credit file, there doesn't appear to be any trace of the debt, it's definitely within the 6 year period though, and I know it was there when I first registered for the service in January.
Re: Kitty B v's Egg - Advice needed. They returned my cheque :(
Experian files are tied to name, address and DOB. Would not be surprised if once in a blue moon credit search for persons with common names could return multiple candidates. Possibly your original debt could not be found because it was wrongly input (typed as the wrong name) by Egg onto Experian terminals.
I should not worry about the refernce to "money laundering". Anti-ML precautionary measures are routinely required of financial institutions. So long as your records at Egg are accurate, your Experian file is pretty irrelevant unless it wrongly and adversly impacts your financial reputation.
Kitty B v's Egg - Advice needed. They returned my cheque :(
on the 23rd April.
Reply With Quote
