Jump to content

donotletthem

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    37
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

donotletthem last won the day on September 1 2020

donotletthem had the most liked content!

Reputation

-20 Bad

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Okay so it carries on, Lloyds supplied what they said was the DSAR again missing many items, so this has now been reported to the ICO, who have a six month backlog. Lloyds then said we will not correspond any further you will have to take us to court. LBG know they are in breach of contract but hope we can not raise the £10k + upfront to pay for the N1 and solicitors. LBG solicitors Eversheds then replied to the below letter (names take out) saying they will discuss once I have solicitors write to them. Directors of Lloyds Banking Group CO Eversheds Sutherland (International) LLP 115 Colmore Row Birmingham B3 3AL 10TH December 2020 This is an open letter Dear All Parties With reference to the letter dated 26th November 2020 received by e-mail from Eversheds Sutherland concerning mortgage account number xxxxxxxxxxxxx with Lloyds banking group (LBG). Although in letters dated 7th November 2020, 13th November 2020, Eversheds Sutherland clearly stated a full review of the banks records would be carried out before a full response can be sent it is very disturbing that the response dated 26 November 2020 does not contain 95% of items that LBG have records for. For the purposes of background mortgage account number xxxxxxxxxxxxxx was taken out as a buy to let mortgage on property xxxxxxxxx, had a none agreed product change made to it in 2007 and also had an address change made to it by accident during a system migration. The latter creating a data breach with letters and statements relating to the said mortgage being sent to the buy to let property and being opened by tenants (this data breach was not reported to the ICO). The content of this letter will also show further unreported data breaches on third party credit card accounts that have not been reported. Issues with the mortgage account that were first discovered in November 2017, however the severity of the issues did not become apparent right away. With the letter also outlining Fraudulent activity along with the withholding of information carried out by LBG between 2017 and 2020. For avoidance of doubt the following letter outlines that mortgage account number xxxxxxxxxx is voidable on the following grounds, Terms breached, mistakes made by party offering the contract, misrepresentation, and fraudulent (omitting / falsifying facts or information). LBG have also acted fraudulently to cover up mistakes made, whilst also not disclosing / purposely withholding and altering information which should have been included in DSAR requests. The below examples also highlight offences by LBG under the fraud act 2006, Can we please remind you this is a criminal offence and that the company officers will be liable to be charged with the offence as well as the company. Credit checks: As part of the many DSAR requests xxxxxxx has asked for the two credit checks 2005 for the original application and 2007 for the change of product and all information relating to the credit checks to be included in the DSARs. LBG have purposely withheld this information as it shows many mistakes made in the correspondence xxxxxxxx has had with LBG since November 2017. Firstly, LBG state in many letters, e-mails (example e-mail to xxxxxxxx from Mr xxxxx dated 29 March 2018) and conversations shown below that they have never held any other address than xxxxxxxxx for xxxxxx and xxxxxxxx however xxxxxxxx has never lived at xxxxxxxxx with the original mortgage agreement also listing xxxxxxxxx as living at a different address. Mr xxxxxx also quoted in an e-mail dated 4 April 2018 that xxxxxx was the associated address for xxxxxxxx. This means that either the credit check was incorrectly carried out and incomplete or LBG have made mistakes and acted fraudulently in stating no other address has ever been held. Due to the above mortgage account number xxxxxxxxxx is voidable on the following grounds, mistakes made by party offering the contract, misrepresentation, and fraudulent (omitting / falsifying facts or information) For the 2007 credit check carried out on xxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxx at xxxxxxxxxx, as stated by a number of LBG representatives, it is now apparent no credit check was carried out, 10th April 2018 Ms/Mrs XXXXX wrote to xxxxxxxx in this letter she quotes “Under our product transfer process in 2007 it was not a requirement for you to sign any documents in relation to the product transfer. Neither was it a requirement of the Bank to carry out a credit search on either of you” this means the many quotes stating credit checks had been carried one of which was by Ms/Mrs xxxx are fraud by false representation and was carried out with dishonest intent to cause a loss to xxxxxxxx. Can we please remind you this is a criminal offence and that the company officers will be liable to be charged with the offence as well as the company. None agreed product change: In 2007 the product was changed from 4.79% to a fixed two-year rate @ 6.23% plus a £699 fee, this was a mistake made by LBG who then continuously acted fraudulently to cover up this mistake. The next section is made up of quotes taken from telephone calls between ******* and representatives of LBG and highlights many examples of mistakes made by party offering the contract, misrepresentation, and fraudulent (omitting / falsifying facts or information). 23 March 2018 LBG Mr S xxxxxxx from executive complaints. In this call Mr S xxxx told xxxxxx when talking about the 13 November 2017 calls “not all calls are recorded, also no supporting notes are on the file to confirm the calls took place”. This quote by Mr S xxxx to xxxxxxx is an attempt to withhold information by saying it doesn’t exist, once LBG realised the consequence of the content of these calls. In the Novermber 2017 calls ****** was told the address had change due to a system migration issue. The next two statements show LBG had been aware of the calls as Ms/Mrs W xxxxxx references the calls prior to Mr S xxxx saying they do not exist. Case reference xxxxxxxx from the 19tt March 2018 when Wendy Zeal states that xxxxxxx address change was only first ever noted on 13 November 2017. Wendy Zeal also put this quote in writing as part of a response letter dated 23rd March 2018. This is evidence of LBG acting fraudulent. As this is fraud it voids the contract on mortgage account number ********* 4 April 2018 LBG call handler Mr J xxxx during this call J makes the following statement to ****** when asked about how ******** address had changed during a system migration “I mean there has been no system changes so actually I think they was talking about you rebranding of your account from G&G to Lloyds” further on in the conversation James comments “on the balance probably it has been likely that a similar mistake has been made here” when asked if a member of staff may of made a mistake when adding the product change. Again this shows from the outset that LBG had a doubt about the truth of the charge. James then went on to say when asked about the mistake of changing the product “No we contacted you to tell you about your previous” this was an attempt to cover up the mistakes. However, this does show mistakes made by party offering the contract and voids the contract on mortgage account number 50000081506785. To show misrepresentation by James above we will now quote a conversation from LBG call handler Luke INUM 610142078499453 during this call Luke spoke to a second advisor who said to Luke “Okay let me just check, if it’s 2007 I don’t think I will be able to see it in my system because my system is actually for 2013 and up” this statement shows there had been a system change and shows the statement from James 4 April to be a mistake made by the party offering the contract. In the notes Mr J added to the system on the 5th April 2018 James quotes “I have told him we would write out with copies of the notes from the telephone call in 2007.” This is an attempt to falsify information and voids the contract on mortgage account number *********. 6th April 2018 LBG call handler Ms E xxxxx told ******* when ******** explained no change of product had been made or requested “So what we’ve enclosed is a copy of the conversation of your mortgage in which you chose a product that had the associated fee with it, so we sent that evidence out to you in the post so you should be getting it”, Ms E xxxx also went on to say that she didn’t know what address the evidence had been sent to “I can’t see that information because the colleague printed off the application it’s self and sent that out to you”. This evidence was never received nor was any application form that we completed ever received, these items have also been requested as DSAR requests but never received. The only conclusion we can now come to is that the items do not exist. meaning Ms E made mistakes, misrepresented LBG and acted Fraudulently and falsifying facts and information and voids the contract on mortgage account number *************. 6 April 2018 LBG call handler AJ, first it is noted that the time of the calls according to the transcripts is incorrect to the time the calls took place. This is shown in the call that took place according to the transcript @ 12.52pm and lasted 3m 4s however during this call the time of 3.26pm is discussed as a promised call back by 3pm hadn’t taken place. During call 609190145394775 AJ clearly states to ******* in answering to ****** question “Have I signed to the charge” AJ “Yes, there was actually a declaration, because we will not be proceeding with a change of the product, ****** if there is no signature from both account holders. There was a declaration that you have signed that you will be changing the product. Now, the £699 conversion fee is a non-refundable product fee to the mortgage.” This statement from AJ is classed as Fraud by false representation Section 2 Fraud act 2006 and therefore voids the contract on mortgage account number ******** . Later on during this call ****** asked AJ “But how did you credit check?” this question was in relation to how the change of product was credit checked in 2007 AJ responded “Okay, there are ways to credit check” “if you are living in a different address, you and ****** has been living, or was living in a different address, but there are ways to credit checks, ******* After another minute in the conversation AJ then stated “We will not be charging a product without any of your, any of your authorisations both ******* and ******* in it.” When ****** quoted to AJ the following “I haven’t signed anything that’s what I’m telling you.” AJ responded Evidences can be produced, evidences can be produced ******, we have all the evidences, all the documents that you have signed.” The above quote was not made by mistake but made by Fraud by false representation The following quotes where all made by AJ during the said call and are all Fraud by false representation Section 2 Fraud act 2006 · “We can go ahead and send in all the declaration that you have signed that you have agreed to it *******, there is no problem with that.” · “We can produce the evidence *******” · “We cannot Guarantee that we are going to revert this, Okay, because all the documentation is here ********. · “Right, there is no fraud if you have signed to it *******, Okay.” The next passage is in an exchange later on in the conversation ******* “How can you produce something that wasn’t signed for? Do you fraudulently produce it?” AJ “********, we have your signatures on the declaration, you have agreed to change the product.” ******** 2 You don’t. That’s what I am saying, you don’t because we haven’t signed anything.” AJ “That’s what I am saying as well that we have your signature that you have agreed to it.” ******* “I am telling you I have not received anything to agree to it so how could I have signed something?” AJ “So we admit that we have sent it to the wrong address Okay, but these charges.” ******** “Okay if you have sent it to the wrong address, can you listen” AJ “will be mentioned to you as soon as you have agreed to it Okay” ******** “I haven’t agreed to anything” AJ “Okay, if you have not agreed to it then we will just produce the documents that you have signed There is no problem with it” ******** “Documents that, that’s what I am trying to tell you, documents that I have not signed” AJ “That you have signed and we can produce, ********. ******** “Documents that I have not signed because I never ever received anything about it. I didn’t know anything about it until I phoned up last night for my redemption figure” AJ “I understand that the confirmation letter was sent out to you, to an incorrect address but the declaration has definitely been received with you signatures.” This exchange highlights three items from section two of the Fraud act 2006 as follows; made a false representation dishonestly knowing that the representation was or might be untrue or misleading As this is fraud it voids the contract on mortgage account number *********. 6 April 2018 LBG call handler Mr R xxxxxx(AJ’s manager) called ***** during the conversation and quoted to ***** “When it comes to getting a new rate there should obviously be a confirmation from the bank, from the customer side there should be some signage” Mr R then goes on to quote “the document or the signatory must have been archived” then Mr R makes the statement “We can say yes it was sent out to a different or wrong address” This conversation with Mr R again highlights mistakes made by LBG with mortgage account number ******** voiding the contract. 6 April 2018 LBG call handler Ms M during a call ******* had with M, M put ***** on hold and had a conversation with a manager called Ms L xxxx during this call Ms L xxx said to M “I mean the customer is welcome to speak to me and erm, I can explain that we have received documents from him and it is open” This is another fraudulent statement made by LBG and is classed as Fraud by false representation Section 2 Fraud act 2006 and therefore voids the contract on mortgage account number ********. 6 April 2018 LBG call hander V xxxx call INUM 608617030411230 During this call with ****** Vxxxx removed her headset and spoke to a colleague in the background during this conversation the colleague makes the statement “to V...“He would have signed something” This again shows mistakes made by LBG. 6th April 2018 LBG call handler A D Jr. stated to ******* and has also added to the notes on file “I have apologised for this mater but told him that the charge is valid and we can produce the documents for him but will need to be posted” This is another fraudulent statement made by LBG and is classed as Fraud by false representation Section 2 Fraud act 2006 and therefore voids the contract on mortgage account number ********** LBG call handler A INUM 608618030684268 during this call with ******* A talks to a second advisor about when a call back was meant to be made to ****** at 3pm “this note was left at ten past 3 and it’s from erm I think that might be AJ in offshore” this demonstrates notes left on accounts do not correspond with what has happened, and confirms mistakes made by the party offering the contract. Missing / withheld / altered items from DSAR requests 21 March 2018 LBG call handler Ms/Mrs W from executive complaints, although this call should have been included in a number of DSAR requests, the first request for this call was made on 23 March 2018 to LBG it has still not been received in this call W hung up on ****** and also stated the calls from 13 Nov 2017 did not exist. 23 March 2018 e-mail from Mr S XXXXX to Mr B xxxxx in this e-mail S states ****** has made DSAR request for calls and quotes “I have agreed that this does seem to be key, but also that our systems and notes hold no indication to what he suggests”. Mr B also wrote to ******* via e-mail at 16.40 on the 23 March 2018 and quoted in the e-mail “Unfortunately we have not yet been successful and there are no notes on our systems to verify this call was received. This quote is a mistake and an attempt to withhold information voiding mortgage account number 50000081506785. On the same day Ms/Mrs W..... wrote a letter to ****** and quoted “it wasn’t until 13 November that ****** correspondence address was noted as 27 Regents Way. If as Mr S said and Mr B e-mailed the call didn’t take place how can Ms/Mrs W quote an action from the 13 November 2017 call? This again is confirmation of mistakes made, misrepresenting LBG . 13 October 2020 Ms/Mrs Suzanne xxxxx confirmed LBG Technical Services confirmed a number of calls had been adapted before being sent as part of DSAR requests to ********* 20 January 2020 a FOI and DSAR request was made via e-mail for information on how many people have been impacted by system migration issues within LBG over the last 10 years. LBG have never responded to the requests although the requests have been chased. 6th April 2018 Mr A G jr called ***** however this call is missing from all DSAR requests as LBG are withholding the information from the call. In the letter dated 10 April 2018 Ms/Mrs W xxxx says “I have reviewed the calls between 5 – 7 April and it is clear you wanted an immediate refund of the product fee. During the course of the conversations with us we clearly let you know this would only be reviewed as part of your complaint about the product transfer which you dispute you requested. My response now fully answers the complaint” This quote is clearly an attempt to withhold information 9th April 2018 12.41 a DSAR request was made for LBG to supply transcripts of all calls between*****and LBG between 5 – 7 April 2018 when this DSAR was completed and Mr Ben Xxxxx confirmed on the 16 August 2018 that calls had been sent, however LBG purposely withheld the calls between AJ and ****** from the 6 April within this DSAR and therefore voids the contract on mortgage account number 50000081506785. 8 October 2018 ***** made a further DSAR to Mr B xxx for the calls between 5-7 April 2018 via email by Mr B replied to another Mr B on the 17 October 2018 and quoted “I can confirm the calls you have requested have been located and sent to you via recorded delivery.” As disk addressed to Thomas *****t was received by ****** on the 18 October the disk did not contain the calls from AJ on the 6 April as LBG had purposely withheld the information and not fulfilled the DSAR request. A further DSAR request was made on the 18th October 2018 for transcripts of all calls between 5-7 April 2018. ***** received the transcripts on the 21 November 2018. Again a number of calls from the 6th April had been purposely withheld by LBG, with it being clear these calls did take place as the received transcripts had references to the calls. 22 November 2018 12.58 ****** made a further DSAR request “Please find attached the information request for all calls from 2 April – 7 April 2018. If transcripts of all calls are not received this time it will not look very good in court when the phone records are produced.” Notes on LBG files 21 June 2018 added by H G. “At final response stage we upheld the complaint and gave the customers the benefit of the doubt in relation to the issue of the correspondence address” This shows LBG had made mistakes meaning mortgage account number 50000081506785 is voidable. Notes on LBG files 28 Sept 2018 Ian Write added notes to say he had spoken to Toby from FOS and had told Toby “that he had review UFSS and having reviewed there were no notes or calls between 2009 and 2018. This was an attempt to hide information from FOS 17 October 2018 after it had been proven the 13 November 2017 calls existed LBG then sent the calls out on disk address to Thomas, Ben, also added a note on file this day saying “customer is still waiting on the signed paperwork of the mortgage account” This shows LBG had made mistakes meaning mortgage account number 50000081506785 is voidable. On the 08 November 2018 ***** made a DSAR’s request via e-mail the request read “Please supply a list of all products that have been held by myself stating the start and end dates along with the registered address and change of address with dates for the life time of the product.” This DSAR request was never completed by LBG. LBG have withheld this information purposely as it shows LBG did have ****** and ******* correct address of *******. Credit card issues ******* This is a breach of the data protection act 1998 concerning receiving credit card statements on numerous occasions over a 5 year period for a third party and also none compliance of a SAR request. We first of all received credit card chasing letters for a ****** relating to none payment of a Halifax credit card at our home address ****** back in 2014, we called the bank and where told just to return saying not know at this address, we did this for about 5 months but nothing happened although we had called many times and returned all letters. Eventually we raised a formal complaint the bank apologised and we stopped receiving the letters. After this we thought nothing of it until 2018 when we started to receive credit card statements for ******. We called the bank and wrote many letters / e-mails by now I knew all of ******* credit card history and that ******** again hadn’t paid his card which worried us as it could black list our address. We questioned the bank as to why we had received the statements to which we had a reply that this was due to a migration of systems. and then at a later date Lloyds banking group decided due to implications with another case that they hadn’t said this and that the reason we had received the statements was due to a block on the card had been accidently removed. This of course is not the truth as if a block was simply on the card how did ****** receive new credit cards. We knew this as the statements showed that ******** between 2014 and 2018 had received new credit cards. A DSAR request was made in November 2018 to receive transcripts of the calls concerning the credit cards and that we had been told it was due to system migration and although proof the calls had been made no transcripts have been received although on the 14 November 2018 Marin Bxxxxx did acknowledge calls had been made. LBG did not report this data breach to the ICO. Further mistakes with mortgage account number ********* The customer created date on the mortgage system is 01/01/1957 as listed in the documentation as part of DSAR’s made. In 1957 nor ****** or ******* had been born thus being a mistake made by the party offering the contract. 27 March 2018 Mr Ben XXXX e-mailed ****** and stated “I have tried to call you today on the number you provided ********** but this has come back as an incorrect number. This is a mistake made as LBG have spoken to ******* on this number many times and included it in DSAR documentation, this is still ********* telephone number. Conflicts of interest A number of requests have been made to LBG for the conflicts of interest policy including DSAR requests however this policy has never been provided and it does appear LBG do carry out many conflicts as listed below March 2018 a complaint was made about the rudeness and attitude of Ms/Mrs W xxxxx, to the directors and senior managers in LBG, this complaint was given to W xxxxx to reply to. This is a conflict of interest. In October 2020 an official complaint was made to LBG about Sarah H, this complaint was given to Sarah H to respond to Not all items on file have been discussed above, with all issues between March – November 2020 also left out at the moment however there is relevant evidence which outlines that mortgage account number ********is voidable on the following grounds, Terms breached, mistakes made by party offering the contract, misrepresentation, and fraudulent (omitting / falsifying facts or information). LBG have also acted fraudulently to cover up mistakes made, whilst also not disclosing / purposely withholding and altering information which should have been included in DSAR requests. The above examples also highlight offences by LBG under the fraud act 2006, Can we please remind you this is a criminal offence and that the company officers will be liable to be charged with the offence as well as the company. We would also like to remind LBG that they will be liable for all legal costs ******* and ********* occur moving forward.
  2. Firstly contact details are incorrectly removed as we have permission from Lloyds bank To update you on what is happening, we received yesterday an e-mail from Lloyd's telling us they need a 60 day extension for the DSAR, as the DSAR was only made on the 10th August 2020. We have pointed out again that the DSAR was made in 2018 and 2019 and we discussed the missing information in January 2020 and that Lloyds even replied on the 24th January 2020 in writing about the missing information and we would received it ASAP as the delay was unacceptable. This reply was from Vanessa Murden and Sarah Harrowsmith. This is now seen as delaying tactics, Lloyds are unsure what to do knowing we have evidence of the failure to disclose information in a DSAR, due to this and after two and a half year patience has finally ran out and a N1 for damages is to be submitted. The parliamentary standards committee along with the ICO have also been informed of the breach. We have also received evidence that derogatory language has been used about myself in written and verbal communications which we are deeming as damaging to my character which action is to be take against.
  3. hope these numbers are helping people out let me know if you have used them or need any other numbers
  4. Happy to be of help. let me know if you don't get what you need
  5. Group CFO: William Chalmers, mobile and office numbers 07766304450, 0208 9365656, email address [email protected]
  6. Group Customer services director and chief operating officer: Vanessa Murden, mobile numbers 07342082417 and 07593624752, email address [email protected]
  7. All Lloyds directors contact details will appear under the contact post started 2 September 2020
  8. Head of customer services: Sarah Harrowsmith, mobile number 07468755999 e-mail address [email protected] Retail transformation director: Stephen Noakes, mobile number 07341071137, email address [email protected]
  9. [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] how many of the senior team do you want I also have all the telephone and mobile numbers of the senior team
  10. If a company is in the wrong, has ver poor customer services and thinks they are more powerful than the law be prepared for the long fight do not give up and go to the top. If you have all the proof you will win in the end. I am posting over the next few days all the directors contact details to help everyone with their own individual fights
  11. Yes give her a bell she is just back from vacation and should be available
  12. Head of Complaints Sarah Horrowsmith ‭07468 755999 Sarah Harrowsmiths manager is Vanessa Merdan how is the chief operating manager
  13. I have managed over the last few years to gather most of the directions and senior customer service staff contact details, emails phone numbers etc. This evening someone called Jessica From Lloyd’s bank gave permission for these to be posted in a public form. Starting at 9am tomorrow I will start posting if you need details hey please DM and I’ll forward
×
×
  • Create New...