Jump to content

Hondaman56

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Hondaman56

  1. Well, I've received another letter today - and it looks like it is their response to my SAR request. Problem is, they've summarised charges on my present current account only, and then summarised a list of items NOT included - such as interest! In my SAR I specifically itemised ALL the accounts I wanted full data for, INCLUDING any manual interventions. So, they have not complied with my request. I am writing back just now to explain that they have not complied, and the meter is still running! To be fair, they destroyed the (HSBC) cheque that I included for their fee...... They really do seem to be incapable of replying to letters sent. Perhaps they go through some change when entering the parallel universe that is banking in the UK?
  2. Pete I wasn't seriously suggesting criminal activity to get into the press - it was precisely what you said - an expression of frustration. I agree entirely that negative publicity is not what is needed - hence my "smile" at the end of the comment - and indeed, that positive publicity is harder to find. My course of action at present is as suggested below; in that I will complain to the ICO, FOS, and ensure my SAR is lodged viz. my credit card as well as the bank accounts. Thanks again.......
  3. Thanks Castlebest. Have put an SAR for full info on the crdit card today - can't believe I forgot to do that with all the other row going on about it up to date! I've sent Colin Langdale a letter today with the SAR indicating my intent to report HSBC to the ICO, to the FOS, and "possibly" to start a court action - not necessarily limited to just refund of unfair charges. As regards media - yes, an angle is all important. I suppose "stealing" (sorry, unlwafully removing/using their claimed right of set off even though the account was in dispute) the rent money only allows a certain amount of hardship. I did, when the whole issue kicked off, head straight to the local police station. I told them I wanted to report a crime of theft. They told me it was a civil matter. I asked them how long it would take the to get to [location of branch] if they had a report of the windows going in. They told me 15 minutes - it is literally a minute and a half along the road. Anyway, I told the officer behind the counter I'd wait for them. They didn't seem to get it.........maybe I can get it into the press that way lol! Seriously, though, I will keep my thinking hat on for the angle - maybe a mass request from everyone on CAG to Watchdog or something......
  4. Well, isn't that a royal pain! So, since Section 247 repeals, among other things, the above useful piece of legislation, what equivalent protection is provided in its place I wonder? I guess it goes back to the Data Protection Act after all? Thanks Meshi
  5. Pete Thank you. Yes, annoyed is probably understaement of the day at present....8) I have just completed the obligatory draft letter to Mr Colin Langdale at the above mentioned Gate to Hell. However, I will err on the side of caution, and probably re-write the entire thing tomorrow. No doubt it is presently full of invective that will leave me wide open further down the road. Just a thought - how does it go with threatening full media attention at this stage - my instinct to be honest, is not even to reply to these jokers, but simply to issue a Letter Before Action on the credit card matter (bearing in mind there will be two more following, one on each of two current accounts), and go straight to the media with it all at the same time...... Whaddya all reckon?
  6. UPDATE: I have today received a letter on the credit card matter. You just have to hand to them their evident skill in (a) missing the point entirely, (b) denying that what is factually in front of their noses even exists, and © their ability to consistenly acknowledge any act of inpropriety on their part. I am now absolutely positive that bank staff get trained in the same place traffic wardens do. Today's letter, a reply to my very comprehensive letter outlining where, and why, they were wrong, including proof, and pointing out the relevant law, states that the writer is "sorry" I have found it necessary to complain AGAIN! Also, that "despite her best endeavours" I remain dissatisfied - really? What, after losing all my claim papers (which were personally delivered into branch staff hands), ignoring my requests for replacement papers, ignoring the fact that I put the account into dispute on 14 Dec 07, the fact they have defaulted the account since, that they stole £950 from my account causing charges on top (which charges they have NOT refunded) and the absolute fact that they deny ANY wrongdoing whatever would leave me dissatisfied???? Whatever would make them think that? Oh, poor HSBC! They also have the bald temerity to state that HSBC "does not recognise that the account is in dispute" - I'm not entirely sure what understanding sending them a letter stating that I disagree with the account status, - that I am disputing it would bring them to - perhaps a letter before action will encourage a different reognition. The writer further confirms that the account will not be recalled from our friends MCS - well bully for her - I've already told MCS that I refuse to deal with them as HSBC have NOT followed the rules. She then states that she cannot comment why Norwish Union would consider the case (note she puts this in quotes) despite non receipt of my original claim - well, who's fault was that, again? She also notes quite clearly that payments were maintained on the account up to the date of my claim..........which they claim was not received! She then apologises that this is not the response I was expecting......that she trusts this clarifies the bank's position, that little can be gained from further correspondence into the matter, that the bank has confirmed its position and will not change, and that this is "our final decision". She then states that I can escalate the matter to the "Manager" of the team, or refer, as indicated in my letter, to the Financial Ombudsman. What a pile of effluent, frankly. Assembled congregation, I would like to assure every single one of you that I intend to pursue HSBC to the Gates of Hell, and beyond. They have done me a significant wrong. I had a credit card account with a blance of approximately £2600 against a £4000 limit in Sept 2007, when I was made redundant. I am working again, but, in that time, not only have they lost claim papers hand delivered to them, subsequently ignored both written and verbal communication, stolen money from me, but they have also managed to increase considerably the balnace, defaulting me at £4610, and now denying they have done any wrong at all. How very dare they. I will, this evening, write to Colin Langdale (again) in which I will set out my position - reiterating briefly the facts, pointing to the evidence they've had, and accompanying it with an LBA - for the entire balance, damage, and costs. I may also indicate that I will complain to the national press - as I feel inclined to do so, and I will liberally mention the harassment (MCS, DG) and hardship they've caused. And, I suppose, I will continue to try to open another bank account somewhere else.....
  7. Remind them of their legal duty under the Data Protection Act. As you say, theey have been happy to take your money, and will send to the address you've lodged with them - if that's on the Electoral Register, against your name, they have no issue. They do not legally need ANYTHING with your signature on it. Regards
  8. Hi Margaret Your contract is probably with the insurer underwriting the cover - not with PC World - they would only act as agent in this case, although they may have sold you the computer. You probably have a case for failure to perform, for compensation and for damages - so long as the time frame specified in the agreement for repair has passed, and no rememdy has yet been forthcoming (or does not go far enough to satisfy the rights of the agreement. A lot may depend on the agreement you signed, and requested repair under. In any case, they cannot argue their liability is limited to nothing - which is what they're trying to do by blaming the courier. I'd be liaising with this insurer underwriting the policy at this point as a next stage to see what they have to say.
  9. Not strictly true. Any image (or voice recording) may be admissable as evidence if it can be shown that there was a reasonable likelihood of belief that a recording (voice or video) was likely to be made [of an incident, or event]. Of course, the data needs to be provably authentic too. A written statement, notice, or poster advising that calls (or video) are generally recorded suffices as notification that you may be recorded - and continuation (of speech or motion) provides tacit agreement to be recorded in most cases. No CCTV system in the UK would be legal otherwise. Obviously, in the case of a telephone call this will not work - hence the recorded statement on many call centre telephone systems that your conversation *may* be recorded. Final note - there are circumstances in which a recording obatined without subject permission can (and is) used in evidence. Clearly, that would be difficult to substantiate in the case of a missing computer, however.
  10. Thanks Sharpman Useful in that it led me to the Limitations Act, 1980. Section 24 states: 24. Time limit for actions to enforce judgments. — (1) An action shall not be brought upon any judgment after the expiration of six years from the date on which the judgment became enforceable. (2) No arrears of interest in respect of any judgment debt shall be recovered after the expiration of six years from the date on which the interest became due. I can comprehend this being the basis on which CCJ information is retained on a credit reference file for six years - it would be a matter of public record for that duration, and hence *could* be used, published, or otherwise obtained by any person. I am unable to equate this Act to the reporting of financial data to Credit Reference Agencies, however - defaults, late payments, and such are not judgments (apart from in the eyes of financial institutions). The only information I can find so far (other than for court judgment) is in effect Principle 5, which neatly avoids timescales, but provides an arguement that can be used both ways - namely that Personal Data processed for any purpose or purposes shall not be kept for longer than is necessary for that purpose or those purposes. It would follow, that for information other than Judgments, there is no legal basis on which data is reported for six years - but rather, is "kept as long as necessary" for the purpose of financial reporting on an individual or individuals? Surely there must be some statue which prescribes an absolute limit on this kind of data retention? If not, clearly, a serious challenge needs to be made in respect of the CRAs making available (not necessarily retaining or storing, just making available) much of the data they collect about an individual for such a length of time - six years surely being a period which would cause both distress and damage - as per s.10 of the DPA? It is a puzzle, to be sure - and you know, I may just ring the CRA's one after the other tomorrow and ask them on what grounds they make available this data for the length of time they do.......
  11. Hi Gang I have another question, which someone with law knowledge will hopefully know the answer to - Reading through most of the available literature, seeking advice in the way one does, the general understanding is that information about a person and information concerning him kep in public record is available for a period of six years. What legislation provides this right? I've had a look through the County Courts Act 1984, and cannot see a timescale for any judgement entered. I've looked at the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 and cannot see any relevant statute there either. I'm not aware of the DPA providing any timescale for retention of publicly accessible data - because the DPA, as much as anything is about storing the data, managing it, and giving it to the correct people....insofaras the DPA is relevant it is only, I believe for the purpose of ensuring data is not kept longer than necessary. Who decides how long "necessary" is? Any pointers gratefully received....
  12. Hi All I understand the terms "Default" and "Termination" to have different legal meanings - but; What is the position in law where an account or agreement is placed in Default, and the account is subsquently indicated as being closed? Is that legally the same as termination of the agreement which would have been in place to operate the account? If it is determined as such, then it would also appear to me that every Credit Reference Agency is essentially in breach of the CCA 1974, Section 174(1). No information obtained under or by virtue of this Act about any individual shall be disclosed without his consent. Surely when an agreement is terminated, the creditor cannot continue to enforce rights under an agreement is has terminated, and by terminating an account (closing it) has surely stated that no agreement continues to be in place by EITHER party? Specifically, if a creditor terminates an agreement, under what legal instrument do they continue to make reports to a credit reference agency, or indeed, continue to keep updated records about a person? By revoking the agreement, are they not also, either specifically, or by implication, also giving up any right to use permissions given by the debtor in force during the agreement? Does anyone know of any case law regarding this at all? Thanks.
  13. If your 40 days are up - i.e. since Littlewoods cashed your cheque, then its time to get the Information Commissioner involved - by all means send Littlewoods a letter stating that their failure to comply with your request for data (your SAR) has resulted in a breach of the Data Protection Act. Make sure your letter is aimed at the "Data Controller" for Littlewoods. I would be getting the IC involved now, as that will add wieght at least to any case you may bring against them.
  14. Pete You've effecitvely already executed the SAR by obtaining your files. What you need to do now is challenge the information with the organisations who have placed the information. You may need to speak with each of the agencies to find out more detail - it would be likely that information on one is similar to that on the other. Defaults *can* be challenged for a few reasons - such as where you did not receive any default notice, or where the account was actually settled prior to the date of default. In any case, once you have details of who placed the default on your file, write to the Data Controller for that organisation - e.g. say a default had been registered by A BANK PLC - you may find the correct address to write to here - but if not, find a contact number, phone then and ask for the address of the Data Controller - if they do not provide this, they are breaking the law (Data Protection Act). You should receive a reply in a fairly short space of time, letting you know they will (or why they won't) comply with your request. Where the information is evidentially incorrect, they have a duty to correct it - again, Data Protection Act, and pssibly other legislation too. Keep us informed - and keep fighting!
  15. Hi Pete I may well be corrected if I'm wrong here, but: A notice of correction is not the way to go. It can do more damage than help in the long run, because unlike other information, it does not come off your file when the item the notice addresses does - it stays on until you request its removal..... and can affect future credit by pointing out that you had a problem in the past, after the issue has gone. In your situation, from what you've said, you've started the correct way - in that you've been in touch with the insurer, and your former employer and requested the correct information. What you need to do is ensure that what the insurer told you is put in writing as soon as possible. You have a defence in court then if it ever comes to it. Once you have that in writing, and a written notice that the insurer will settle your HP, you then need to tackle the issue of the entry on your file. I would be inclined to send a letter to the finance company, accompanied by a copy of the letter from the insurer stating what you've written in your post (or words to that effect) and pointing out that the information is inaccurate in the circumstances. I'm not sure that you have a case under the DPA, but you may well have a case against either of your former employer, or the insurance company, for defamation, though you would need everything in writing setting out each party's position first to determine that. Most especially you would need to find out how, why, and when the insurance company came to believe you were fit for work, and no longer entitled to benefit from your policy. Keep us posted.
  16. Hi Paul Thanks for your informed reply. I realise that they're not stating specifically that I might have been money laundering, and I know that financial institutions claim to have to ensure that their facilities aren't being used for that purpose. Just never seen it stated so baldly before, and the other thing that comes to my mind is why would they be searching my file for any purpose, especially something like "money laundering" a YEAR or so after I applied for the mortgage (which I didn't take in the end anyway)? I am beginning to think that there should, perhaps, be a proper duty placed on those searching credit files to record some detail about why they are searching - and what it means!!! Looking through the standard of some of the reporting I've found on my file leaves me very un-confident that my data (much less my finances) are in capable or cometent hands......
  17. Thanks all for the nice words. I'd like to give back to the community in any way I can rather than just take - it is largely as a result of the information I've found here that I have been able to take a more structured stance toward fighting this good fight. Were it not for this community, I would, likely as not, have reverted to ranting, raving, and bricking their windows - which would have probably reduced my blood pressure a little, but would not have got my money back..... As far as alternatives to banks go, no there isn't many (if any). I have an employer who will only pay me by BACS. I have retail around me, like you, who will not accept cheques, even with the nice £100 guarantee card my lovely bank gave me, or £50 notes - and another key problem I have is that I don't think you can pay the congestion charge (yes, another great rip off) by cash - which I need to do on a regular basis when in London. Car parks and parking meters are going the same way. So, yes, it seems we have sold our souls (finanially anyway) into the banks - they have us totally, at present - in this cashless society of ours. So, the options at present seem to be - the most basic bank account possible with a card, or local "shareholder banking"/credit union, or cash if you can. I guess a "mass uprising" against the banks of some sort if the only thing that will bring any pressure to bear on them to change.....and hence this forum and those similar to it.....
  18. Well, I've set the ball rolling. 1) Have sent HSBC a SAR, and they have 37 days left to comply as of today's date. 2) Have also sent rebuttal regarding their stance on their mistake regarding my Credit Card Account with them. 3) Have sent letter to Central Underwriting, Emma Boardman, setting out my position regarding their sudden "unwillingness" to continue my overdraft. 4) Have obtained copies of my credit files from the big three. 5) Have challenged several search entries, a mortgage account entry (which is actually a family member's, at their address, with their date of birth), and have challenged an address with 2 CCJS registered which I have never lived at, and which both have variations of my name against them - one is only an initial, which potentially breaches Registry Trust's guidelines in any case (there should be a full forename and surname) - all on Equifax, some on Call Credit. 6) Next stage is to challenge Nationwide, who linked the address with the CCJS - why, I have no idea, and Natwest, who have both also entered defaults against accounts I had closed, and have never sent default notices, or informed me of any outstanding balance. The interesting thing is both of these accounts had no overdraft facilities, so should never have been overdrawn anyway, and never were when I operated them. 7) HSBC have also defaulted my credit card, despite a dispute being in place since December last year, and have also recorded late payments against my current account, which I'm told are probably because I went over my overdraft limit - which would have been bank charges, and so will be challenged too. 8) Depending on the outcome of HSBC, which fair to say is not simply a charges recovery case, I will probably be minded to take on the CRAs with a view to compensation for the inaccurate data. 9) I also have to tackle Norwich Union as they have a bearing oon the situation with my Credit Card, and may also be negligent, or at least liable for some form of compensation. I really, really, passionately feel that if there was another way to keep money than through a bank (and access it, spend it, etc) I would do it in a shot. These financial organisations (banks, insurance companies, CRAs, DCAs, and associated) have all relied too long on the fact that they have an advantage over us - and frankly that they've had an ability to do whatever they want depsite the law - hopefully a complete sea change is afoot now! I'll keep this thread updated as things happen.....
  19. Hi Sparkie Yup - it's a maybe - I've sent them an email asking me to contact them - sent it for the attention of their Data Controller (and have made it read receiptable). Among other things, I've indicated that if immediate removal is not effected, I will be writing the IC with a view to bringing breach of the DPA into play. Also, possible action for defamation (or calumny, which is more general term for defamation, libel, or slander) if they don't co-operate. I have a mind to request some form of compensation too - the only problem is that I cannot, obviously, prove that I have lost out in any way as a result of their entry (though one could argue implied detriment) - not much of a head turner for a judge in any case. If no response in the next five workng days (Friday) I will fax, and recorded delivery, giving five days for a response. Thereafter, I will be straight onto the IC and a solicitor. I know they have a couple of branches, but yes, as you pointed out, they should still have a Data Protection Registration - if they ar eperforming credit searches it is mandatory, because they are storing and accessing personal data........ Thanks for looking.....
  20. Hi All As some of you may be aware, I've just started the long process of sorting out my bank (HSBC) which is, in turn opening up a load of stuff I never even knew existed. I have joined "checkmyfile" on the web (checkmyfile.co.uk) who seem to be fairly quick at returning data, yet so far, will only do a certain amount of disputing on your behalf (seemingly only blatant errors - and not any potentially grey ones). However, going through this data, I have discoverdd that in May 2007 a company of solicitors - Tollers - carried out a credit search on me for money laundering.....I have emailed them this evening insisting that they correct this data immediately, as it would appear to be defamatory, since it looks like I've been accused of money laundering! I cannot think of a circumstance in which someone would carry out a search stating "money laundering" as a reason - has anyone else come across this? I applied for a mortgage in 2006, almost a year prior to this search, and briefly there was some CIFAS info showing against me, but this does not appear now - and at the time I queried it with my mortgage broker as it was a definite error. If anyone has encountered this, what happened? As far as I can see, it is defamatory, there was no reason at all for the search, and it probably breaches the DPA, Malicious Communications Act(?), Justice Act(?) and possibly others - any ideas? It would be interesting to find out what other "unfeasable" search reasons have been given...... Regards, Hondaman
  21. Well, the letter was dated 22nd August, and they're claiming to end the OD on 24 Sept - I guess that gives them the 28 days - though I think generally, an overdraft is repayable on demand under most Ts and Cs. In any case, yes, Mr Langdale is about to receive several letters from me, (1) the Subject Access Request, (2) a reply to their letter claiming they acted fully and correctly in the matter of my CC (which Norwich Union seem not to agree with, and I certainly don't), and (3) a reply to the OD letter of 22 Aug - pointing out the *immense hardship* immediate and full repayment will cause to my family, among other things. (4) A letter requesting immediate correction to my Credit File - I have today received copies of information held by Experian and Equifax, and await info from Call Credit - there are no less than two, I believe, detrimental entries by HSBC on there - one, despite my registering a dispute concerning the balance of my Credit card as early as January this year, they have recorded arrears, late payments and a default. They have also been recording information about another "account" with a balance, and late payments showing - I have nothing other than my current account with them, and I do not see how I could possibly have "late payments" to that, unless, of course, they are claiming late payment of charges? I have come to the conclusion, very rapidly, that HSBC are nothing more than shysters and scamsters - and not bothered about engaging in some very dubious tactics. The more I read on here, the more concerned I become about banking with any of them. My credit record is such at present that I have a lot of work to do to in order to clear things up - there are seemingly other various errors on there, including an address I've never had anything to do with, but yet at which I seem to have 2 CCJS registered against me, I also have a family member's mortgage data showing on my credit file - though there is a clear difference in identity between he and I, not least in age - and their address is only linked through association. I'm not at all sure any of the CRA's are any better than the banks at the moment. It scares me that people carry on through life totally ignorant of the damage being done to them by organisations like these - both banks and CRAs.....
  22. Hi - and thanks. Yeah - my thoughts exactly, and precisely one (of the many) points I am raising in a letter right now. I've already requested copies of my reports from all the agencies - callcredit, Experian and Equifax. Interesting to see what's recorded, but I am already aware it isn't good - my credit rating seems to have plummeted recently, been unable to get another bank account, failed a landlord credit check, and a few other issues recently too. I've sent off the SAR letter today for all my HASBC accounts, plus I'm about to do the same for a few credit cards the other hlaf has had - including Egg, which cancelled her without a default notice, and which I noticed the thread on. So I'll keep the posts updated and record my experiences for the benefit of all. Last task this evening - find a parachute account! - More so since HSBC have also now decided to cancel my overdraft forthwith! Thanks again.
  23. Hi All Some of you may remember I posted this thread about HSBC Card/MCS taking money from my account under their alleged "right of set off". /forum/hsbc-bank/152400-hsbc-mcs-theft-my Well, update on that is that after three more letters, and a "passionate" visit to my local branch, during which the manageress of the branch ALSO experienced several difficulties in being understood, getting through, finding out what had happened, and so forth - I finally got the money refunded, just over a month after it was taken - but as yet no charges incurred have been refunded. I have also had contact from Norwich Union, the card protection insurer, who claim that because they never received my forms (hand delivered to the bank) they could not accept the claim - BUT, as a one off gesture of goodwill, if I could prove my unemployment/redundancy for that period, they would look at meeting my claim on this occasion - guilty or what! Well, having started a two week holiday from work today, what should I find waiting on the door mat for me this morning, but another letter from HSBC - this time the bank themselves, informing me that they have undertaken a review of my account and are now no longer willing to extend me the overdraft I have had for nearly twelve years all said and done. They want that cleared by 24 September - for which they have two hopes! We obviously all have nearly £2k tucked in our back pockets just waiting for the bank to "change its mind" - yeah, right. Now obviously, I cannot prove that the two are linked in some way, but......if it looks like horse, and smells like horse.......it isn't going to be bacon, is it....... So, as if I needed any more resolve after the initial bit, which is still ongoing, I am now minded to do what I can to obliterate HSBC from the financial landscape - and will be commencing a proram to receover every last pennny I can from HSBC for both the accounts I'm running now, plus my partner's two accounts, plus the joint accounts we held previously. I do say at this point that it seems not only have HSBC (Card) stuck default notices all over my credit file (copy en route), but they may also have put a CIFAS marker on somehow - as I've been told there is one there - I have never defrauded anyone, and will be tackling that with some vigour. Has anyone else ever been CIFAS'd as well as defaulted? Seems *very* nasty to me - as CIFAS may stop you getting ANY credit, work, housing and so forth, depending on the category recorded..... Well, parachute account here we come.......then some nice letters! Rgds, all.
  24. Technically, you would not have had to agree, per se. You did that when opening the account and agreeing to be bound by the contract - which doubtless includes an assignation of rights clause. When HSBC bought Midland, Midland effectively exercised their right to assign all their rights under the contract they had with you - in turn, HSBC would follow their rules about notice and subsequently vary any of the Midland terms they didn't want. But they're still Bas***ds anyway, IMHO!
×
×
  • Create New...