Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by paulwlton

  1. You need all the statements, write back and make it clear that if they refuse you’ll submit a complaint to the ICO.
  2. Hi Peter After reading the opinion I'm not confident in pursuing this.
  3. You really need all the data that the bank holds on you. First time I've heard of their collection centre arranging a loan to refinance.
  4. The legal opinion gives the green light to claim damages under breaches of the DPA 1998 and/or negligence as per Durkin.
  5. Should receive it in the next few days. Looking forward to your comments on the opinion. Regards
  6. Someone that specialises on the subject might be a better way to put it.
  7. Opinion should be with me by Thursday. The expert has been involved in COA cases concerning matters I've raised.
  8. Peter, I agree that Grace is not really required as the data is probably incorrect in any event, contrary to data laws. Nevertheless, I’ve instructed the expert to consider it, so it will be interesting to see if it assists.
  9. But the COA said that a CRA file should show that the account is unenforceable.
  10. Barclays response. Barclays reply.pdf
  11. When status 6 would apply. Status 4-6 or 4-6 & BB - Possible Triggers • If, when status 3 has been set, the customer is showing no realistic attempt to repay the overdraft then, a Status 8 should normally be set. • Status 4-6 will normally only be needed if the customer has made a repayment proposal and is making a realistic effort to repay the overdraft, but the overdraft is more than 3 months beyond its repayment date.
  12. Peter, Is 6 a legitimate entry for a overdraft?
  13. Hi take your point about confusing the issue, but think it could apply if they argue that there is no requirement to file a default. Barclays have offered £150 for distress and inconvenience. I’ll post the letter when it arrives.
  14. In my opinion. If the status of 6 missed payments is excepted, then the credit file should have made reference to the fact that the account was unenforceable. If the credit file wasn't able to show this, then the status of 6 should not have continued to be recorded.
  15. Peter I think the more we can throw at Barclays the better. The legal opinion on merits of the case will be interesting. Paul
  16. Para 38 Grace. 38. As for the second submission, I have not been persuaded that the shortcomings in the CRAs’ registration systems can excuse a registration which is in substance inaccurate because of an omission (namely that the ‘default’ related to an unenforceable agreement). If an accurate registration cannot be accommodated, then the answer is for the industry to change its registration systems, and in the meantime for inaccurate registrations not to be made.
  17. Peter, The creditor isn't legally obligated to register a default once a default/termination notice has expired, its totally at their discretion. What they did in my case was to keep the account status as active. The account became statute barred/unenforceable from 2014 and as per Grace the credit file should have been updated to reflect this. Fourth principle Data Protection Act requires ones personal data to be accurate and up to date. Ive asked the expert to consider Grace, Doyle and Durkin.
  18. But a statute barred debt does not require a court to declare the debt unenforceable? It is fact that the account was unenforceable 6 years after the termination notice was served as per Doyle. I
  19. Hello Peter, Is it not analogous to Grace?...the account was unenforceable by statute. Your advice always appreciated.
  20. Hi Peter The detailed opinion will assist and Ill post it once received. Meanwhile Barclays have gone very quiet.
  21. As I intend issuing a claim in the courts I have asked a lawyer that specialises in this area of law for a written, detailed opinion on the matters I have raised.
  22. Can anyone improve the letter? Cheers. I am now in receipt of my personal data. In 2019 you investigated my complaint and provided your response on the 22nd April. You supported my complaint that my account update was not completed on the agreed date and therefore offered a compensatory payment for distress and convenience. In addition to supporting my complaint you acknowledged that recording the account at the credit reference agencies was longer than intended, however, your opinion was that the data was correct as the balance remained outstanding. You rejected my claim that the account was in a statute barred status from 2014 on the basis that you sent annual statements. Hitherto, you have failed to provide any case law or relevant statute that allows the sending of statements to circumvent the provisions set out in Section 6 Limitation Act 1980. As you continue to insist that the account is not statute barred and reject the application of section 6 LA 1980 I would ask you to seek legal counsel on the matter before continuing to mislead and/or conceal. My contention that the account was time barred was totally reliant on Barclays having a cause of action, which was, for the avoidance of doubt, the written serving of a notice for demand as confirmed in the Court of Appeal in (Doyle V PRA (2019) Further to my contention that the account status of 6 is incorrect It was decided in the Court of Appeal (Grace & ANR V Blackhorse (2014) that where an account is unenforceable by statute the credit file must show this in the status, failure to do so renders the information incorrect and a breach of the Data Protection Act. You have acknowledged that the extended reporting has impacted on my ability to obtain credit and employment, notwithstanding, that you believe the reporting to be correct. However, your claim is now a bad one with the emergence of the notice of demand previously withheld in 2019. For the reasons set out above I request that you review the original complaint. Yours Sincere
  23. Data from telephone transcript dated April 2019. Mr W referred to statute barred I adv we wouldn’t consider the acc to be statute barred as corres have been sent Mr W feels this statement is dishonest, misleading, doesn’t fit in with statute barred legislation.
  24. Peter, Surely it’s the termination letter that gives the bank the cause of action and if they fail to issue within 6 years the account becomes statute barred. The bank are wrong to state that sending an annual statement of account trumps the sec 6 SOL. I will ask them to confirm whether they are relying on case law or qualified legal opinion.
  • Create New...