Inland Revenue are now called HM Revenue and Customs, and are not the same as DWP. I'd be inclined to leave the papers out of it for the moment - it might be a story for a local rag, but as you can see from other posts this sort of thing isn't really news - it happens every day. As far as your MP is concerned, the best bet is to contact his/her constituency office and find out when he/she is doing their next surgery. You can then speak face to face. Take any relevant papers with you. You may also like to complain to the Banking Code Standards Board - Abbey are members - on the basis that financial institutions who subscribe to the Code are supposed to treat their customers 'fairly and reasonably', and 'consider cases of financial difficulty sympathetically and positively'.

When I had a SMART - and I enjoyed every minute of owning it - I used SmartsRUs, who were much cheaper, and better informed, than my local dealership.

Was the subject vehicle new or used at the time your company acquired it?

Misanthropic, Braindead? - Not 'Arf

Don't forget to initiate formal complaints against all concerned, via the FOS scheme, when the time limit expires. From experience, ECI will fail to acknowledge the complaint within the time allowed (5 working days), and won't send you a copy of their complaints procedure (required), all of which simply eats into the 8 weeks allowed for them to resolve the complaint.

When I complained, the reply was from J S Soutar, ECI's General Manager - it may be useful to address your letter to him.

Moron Bankers - No Agreements

They are supposed to acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days. A copy of their written complaints procedure, to include timelines (max 8 weeks), and info that if dissatisfied with their final repsonse, the complaint can go on to FOS, should be provided on request.

The OP could always ask the photographer to sell her the copyright to images - then she can do what she likes with them.

My OH received a letter yesterday, which was a part response to one we sent to MBNA in February regarding the sudden appearance of PPI on her statements. Having first replied that she had requested PPI, they then went on to say that they had "ordered a copy of the original agreement so we can confirm our records are correct" - so they weren't certain. MBNA enclose "an exact copy of the original credit card agreement"; if it is, then I suspect that the lack of APR and credit limit may mean that it is unenforceable. The letter goes on to say that they "confirm that this has not been altered by MBNA" - I wonder why they felt the need to say this? Of course, the PPI box is ticked. In any case, MBNA have still to explain how, according to them, PPI is "clearly shown on every statement", when we have sent them a whole year's worth where it is clearly not shown at all. No doubt all will be revealed when they fulfil the SAR request - their time is nearly up.

Don't you just love the way MCS try to maintain the pretence that they aren't just a department of HSBC.

No-one has said this. However, the article you helpfully referenced shows some occasions when it can cause problems. It's certainly an issue with which many police officers are not familiar - I watched a photographer being hassled by armed police in London because he was taking pictures in the street near some embassies - he'd done nothing wrong but they were certainly talking about public order offences.

Copyright in a photograph belongs to the photographer in almost every circumstance. The most common exceptions are: - where the photographer is employed as such, and the contract of employment specifically gives the employer copyright - where the copyright is assigned to someone else, usually upon payment or as part of a commission There is no law preventing someone taking photographs in a public place, or even at a school. LEAs don't have to get permission or clearance - they do it because they don't know the law and think it'll cover their backsides.

I was there with an aid agency working under UNHCR, though still in the UK military - I was on a leave of absence. Very interesting, and so much better than the sandy adventures the cretin Bliar has since sent me on.

I met the 2eme REP in Sarajevo during the unpleasantness there a few years ago. We were on the same side, which was good. The thought of one of them turning a pompous solicitor into Boudin is especially pleasing...

I certainly wouldn't have sent Calvi's letter. Look at this: ...in other words, they haven't started Court action, and haven't added the charges shown to the amount owing.

Nelson also said: Either he had a premonition of Cabot, or Cabot behave like the little dictator Nelson and Wellington thrashed so soundly (and so often).

Interesting. I wonder if banks and other financial institutions making penalty charges knowing that they are unlawful could also be committing offences under this Act?

Another quotation from Admiral Lord Nelson that seems apposite:

Well, despite ECI hoping I would view their letter as an end to the matter, I have written again, reminding them that the timescale of their acknowledgement of my complaint was outside the requirements of the CCA 2006, as was their failure to send the requested details of their complaint procedure. I have confirmed that I want full details of their client (I know it's Cabot Financial (Europe), but I want to see if any of the rest of the evil empire has any data), and a copy of my consent for Cabot and/or ECI to process my data.

Contacting a debtor directly and bypassing an appointed representative (e.g. CCCS) is contrary to the OFT guidelines. Why not write to BCW, copied to CCCS: If they contact you again, respond with a formal complaint under the new FOS scheme.

Dear BCW Morons You ARE in contact with me. Say what you have to say in writing. Do it NOW to prevent further meaningless correspondence.

The OFT Guidelines have no legal clout, but holders of consumer credit licences are bound by them a breach may lead the OFT to withdraw the licence. The greatest problem to date has been the failure of the OFT to take any tangible and meaningful action against consumer credit licence holders who breach the guidelines. Hopefully FOS's new statutory powers will redress the balance and lead to increased compliance. Additionally, a dispute may not involve a CCA request; an alleged debt could be disputed because the 'debtor' believes that the DCA/creditor is pursuing the wrong person; because the debt consists of or includes unlawful charges; because the 'debtor' disagrees with the amount of the alleged debt, or some other reason. The difficulty revolves around the way in which the debt collection industry operates; it is based upon treating 'debtors' as 'won't pays' rather than 'can't pays' or 'needn't pays'. In general, it uses threats, harassment and psychological pressure from the outset, and worst of all, assumes some sort of moral superiority which extends from treating 'debtors' with contempt to considering itself above the law. There is no doubt that some sanction should be available to deal with those who seek to avoid payment of legitimate debts (and it could be argued that these exist, in the criminal offences of deception and fraud); but there needs to be much more control of the way in which the debt industry currently operates.

I have now received a letter from ECI, confirming that no further activity will take place, that their staff were wrong in regard to statute barred debt, and offering an unreserved apology. Not sure now whether to pursue Cabot over the data protection issue, or let sleeping **** lie.

My OH is in a similar situation - she says she did not request PPI, but payments mysteriously started appearing on statements some two years after MBNA defaulted the account. So far, MBNA have failed to produce a copy of the agreement showing that PPI was requested, have failed to respond as to why they made untrue statements about premium being shown on paperwork, and failed to respond to questions about the collection of premium when the policy was void. We have now written to Gareth Tunnicliffe at MBNA; if he doesn't come up with a satisfactory answer the next letter will be an LBA.