Good afternoon Our daughter has experienced numerous problems at school over the last year and much of what has caused this has been kept from us. Including one serious incident that we have only recently found out. This has led to our daughter being placed on a waiting list for PTSD and other psychological issues. We have formally complained to the school and made submitted a SAR on 02.09.22 The SAR was acknowledged on 02.09.22 and today, ten days later, we have received an email from a company called 'school dpo' who are handling the SAR. They have requested that our daughter must submit a signed letter or email as they state that she is considered mature enough to understand her own rights. We checked this with the ICO and they stated that our daughter would be considered a child as she is under sixteen, and that we should be able to act on her behalf. We have emailed the company and informed them of this and our daughter has now sent in an email giving us authorisation, with an attached image of her signature. Does anyone have any info on the correct process here? Does this mean that the SAR clock restarts? How can this company make a decision on our daughter's current understanding as she is currently a complete wreck!!! Any assistance will be appreciated and apologies if I've posted in the wrong place.

No. It makes direct reference to PPI.

Received an odd letter yesterday from J D Williams. We had an unenforceable account with them that became Statute Barred in February 2015. The letter makes reference to a PPI claim that we put in in 2008, that we have no record of. A check has also been included and the wording states that they made a mistake after rejecting our original complaint and that the payment is the 'full & final settlement' and the complaint is now closed. Any idea as to what is going on here? Are they trying to reset the Statute Barred clock if we cash the check? Any advice would be gratefully received?

Had to post this up as I am absolutely fuming!!! The oven on our repaired cooker went wrong again last Monday evening. I phoned AO and they tried to pass me off to New World again which I was not having. I stated that the last manager that my wife spoke to stated that if the cooker went wrong again they would replace it. After numerous phone calls to AO I was informed on Wednesday that they would replace the cooker as New World wanted to repair it yet again!!! The guy I spoke to stated that the earliset that they could deliver was today and that we would have to get the cooker disconnected and then connect the new one. Well we managed to get the cooker disconnected on Thursday evening as that was the ony day that the electrician was available to do it for us. Since then we have been living off microwave food and takeaways. I decided to check the delivery status about thirty minutes ago and they have no record of any delivery for us for today!!! It looks like we have been completely mislead and now have to await a call back within the hour to see how they will resolve this farce!!! AO are a complete and utter joke!!!

The problem with FOI requests to our HA is that the Act does not apply to a charity, as they have already informed us. So we can't legally request them but we allegedly have a Right to see policies & procedures as a tenant but they can just refuse to provide them. And after all, the HO will just back them up. With regard to the material they referred to in their arguments that they could not, sorry, would not supply, we are in the same position as above. The HA can reference any material, not back it up with physical proof, and it doesn't matter. How can you fight against that?

Our HA to this day have still not even provided us with copies of their complaints procedure, appeals procedure, Right to Buy policy and Customer Care policy. They just kept on stating that the requests we put in were 'disproportionte'. Well obviously the HO think that this is acceptable behaviour. After all, you don't want your customers to know if you are abiding by you procedures and policies do you!!! Better just to say that we are not giving them to you as your request is disproportionate!!! You can treat them as you like then...

Just received the decision from the HO and it's a complete and utter joke. They have sided with the HA. Even though the HA failed to provide us with basic documents like their complaints procedure, appeals procedure and any evidence that they directly referred to in their argument. The HO obviously beleive that this is acceptable!!! I can't belive that this is right. So it's ok for an HA to make up any old tripe and quote it to you as hard evidence because they don't need to back it up when you ask for it!!! Perhaps we'll receive a letter stating that our rent has increased by £2000 a week because of a letter they sent us five years ago... oh, can I see this letter please? No, it's true because we say it is!!! What a waste of time. All of the material they reffered to that they could not provide as it did not exist means sweet FA. Disgusting!

Update: The Cooker has now been repaired. Following the engineer visit on Wednesday, during which he could not repair the cooker there and then, AO decided that they would rather send out a new part than replace the cooker. This caused a lot of concern as the new part did not arrive until yesterday. Though thankfully it is now up and running for the festive season. Thank you to everyone who replied to this thread. Have a great festive season and an even better New Year. Regards TheLion.

Quick update. After a heated discussion on Monday, a manager at Ao has agreed to send an engineer to have a look at the cooker on Wednesday. If the cooker cannot be repaired there and then, they have agreed to send out a next day delivery replacement. Not heard anything about what time the engineer is coming out yet. Hopefully it all works out.

Apologies Bankfodder. The make and model of the cooker is: New World NW50ET Electric Cooker (Black)

Hello. Could someone advise us please on the following problem? We purchased an electric cooker from AO in April and only use it once a day. Today it started giving off an acrid electrical burning smell so we had to turn it off and disconnect it. AO tried to pass the buck to the manufacturer when we initially contacted them but my wife argued the point that they are respnosible as they sold us the product. What are their legal obligations on this and what rights do we have? Any help would be fantastic. Thnk you TheLion.

Update: The ICO are looking in the Data breaches, but state that they will not inform us of anything that happens... We declined the early resolution with our HO through the Housing Ombudsman as negotiation with them seems pointless and we are stressed enough without beating around the bush again. We now have to wait upto ten months for them to investigate it!!! Apparently they are dealing with cases 10 - 12 months older than ours. They have also asked our HO for evidence but requested nothing from us. All we have provided so far is what we could fit onto the complaint form. Can't see how they can consider 'our' complaint if they have virtually no information from us and just a load of tripe from our HO. So we are going to post off our 100+ page wad of evidence, in chronological order, with copies of all communications and evidence that we have. Hopefully they will read it. Not sure what else to do really.

No further contact from the Housing Ombudsman yet. With regard to the latest Data Protection breaches by our HA we have not heard a thing. We are at the start of the third working day now and they have not even acknowledged our emails. The first time this happend, the Managing Director called my wife at work and wanted to speak to her back at our house as it was a 'very serious matter'. Can you go straight to the Housing Ombudsman if your HA won't even acknowledge your complaint?

Waiting for the Housing Ombudsman to contact us. They have taken on the complaint so the ball is rolling. Our HA are really incompetent. In March they sent out a blanket email that included ours, and over two-hundred customers email addresses. Some of the addresses had full names of the owners. They informed the ICO themselves after three complaints, one of which was ours. They stated that this would not happen again and the idiot who did it had received 'training' Obviously this has not worked as we received another email last Wednesday from the same idiot which was sent to four other of his friends. We know they are his friends as it is a personal message. Then on Saturday we received another email. Sent to some very close friends, with 'hugs'. All of these people now have our email. So another two complaints have just been logged. Absolutely useless.

The evidence that we have so far is: Tenancy Agreement with terms and conditions that state we have the Right to Buy from 2001. Four written letters confirming that we have the Right to Buy from a Legal Administrator of their company in 2004. One written confoimation that their company confirms that we have the Right to Buy from 2004. A RTB2 confirming that we have the Right to Buy from 2004. The problem we have is that s171B (6) does not state that the Right to Buy cannot be transferred. It only defines what the relevant 'dwelling-house' is if a 'qualifying person' moves house. In no way, shape or form does it state what they are suggesting. In 2001 we awareded the Right to Buy because I, as my mother's son, fufill the criteria of s171B (4)(aa). That is why thay have confirmed it so many times and why they overturned their own decision back in 2004 at the appeal. My mother was informed prior to the signng of the Deed of Assignment and Licence to Assign that she would lose the Right to Buy and the we would gain it. s171B (5) states the following: '(5)The relevant dwelling-house is in the first instance— (a)in relation to a person within paragraph(a) subsection (3), the dwelling-house which was the subject of the qualifying disposal; (b)in relation to a person within paragraph (b) of that subsection, the dwelling-house of which he became the statutory tenant or tenant as mentioned in [F9subsection (4)]; ©in relation to a person within paragraph © of subsection (3), the dwelling-house of which he became a joint tenant as mentioned in that paragraph. ' This section precedes subsection 6 and confirms that by succeeding my mother's tenancy ,and therefore her Right to Buy, the relevant 'dwelling-house' became the house that we exchanged into. My mother could not take the Right to Buy with her as she no longer had it. We took it with us when we moved house, still with the same HA, that then became the relevant 'dwelling-house' as shown in s171B (6). There is no evidence whatsoever that the HA or their solicitor have provided which states that my mother could not pass on the Right to Buy to us.

This is probably a stupid question but would someone mind clarifying the following in relation to my last post. The evidence we have states that s171A - s171H of the Housing Act 1985 applied to my mother. The HA and their solicitor are choosing to ignore s171B (1) - (5) and focusing, sorry, twisting (6) to fit their case. Can they state that only this subsection applies with no evidence to back it up? Is it illegal to not take into consideration the entirety of s171B which applied to my mother and proves, that we legally gained the Right to Buy? Is it legal for them to twist s171B (6) to fit their case by stating that it proves that the Right to Buy is not transferable even when it states no such thing? Especially when you take the into consideration the section as a whole. Regards TheLion.

The complaint has now ben officially lodged with the Housing Ombudsman. We have stated that we do not want to negotiate at a local level with our HA as we have been more than reasonable already, we want to go straight to the investigation stage. I have nearly completed compiling the evidence for them and can't wait until they start dealing with it. Looking over the some of the material I noticed that their solicitor, Trowers & Hamlins, are stating that we did not gain the Right to Buy for the following reason: 'The Right to Buy granted the HA to your mother, and which became a Preserved Right to Buy upon the stock transfer to her new HA, was personal to her, and not the property. Upon mutual exchange of the properties, this right moved with your mother to her new property. For the avoidance of doubt, we respectively draw your attention to s171B (6) of the Housing Act 1985' Now s171B (6) just refers to the relevant dwelling-house. It does not state that the Right to Buy cannot be transferred: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1985/68/part/V/crossheading/preservation-of-right-to-buy-on-disposal-to-private-sector-landlord s171B (4) (aa) clearly states that a person can become a 'qualifying person' by succession if the tenancy in question was not a joint tenancy and the successor is a member of their family. This was exactly the case in our circumstances. In none of the peperwork does it state that only s171B (6) applies to my mother. It states that sections a171A to s171H apply. Surely the solicitor and the HA cannot just ignore the rest of the subsections in s171B, an Act of Parliament, and pick out what they want because it suits them? All that section deals with is what is defined as a 'qualifying person' and the definition of a 'relevant dwelling-house'.

No problem stu007. It's a real pain. We both work full time so are knackered in the evening. I suffer with Fybromyalgia and general anxiety disorder that has traits of PTSD from military service. Combined with this rubbish it really gets you down and makes just getting up in the morning a battle, let alone holding down a job. Tired but too much adrenaline to sleep at the moment. Gotta try though. Will keep you all updated. Good night all.

Had another laughable letter from our HA's solicitor today. They obviously do not want this going to the Housing Ombudsman: ‘Our client is concerned that despite repeated attempts to set out the position in a reasonable manner, you are not willing to accept the same. ’ And ‘In the meantime, we trust this concludes matters. ’ The last letter we sent was over a week ago. It was polite and just stated that we still require the information that they make reference to within their replies and the copies of their policies. And that this is the last communication from us as we are now going to the Housing Ombudsman. However we believe that it has more to do with our local County Councillor than that letter. He contacted me today and stated that he has made the referral and informed our HA out of general courtesy and they were not happy at all. They even referred him to their solicitor's. I think that they are more of a dictatorship than a charity. It's disgusting.

After reading the phone logs in the SAR we are going to request that they stop using our landline and mobile contacts. They have logged absolute rubbish. We want to keep it solely in writing from now on.

Well we have received the SAR info' and here's the points that I picked out so far: The Stage One reply from our HA contained a copy of our tenancy agreement from the house prior to move where we gained the Right to Buy but the middle signature page was missing. We had the original so we were not that bothered except for the fact that it was signed on behalf of our HA by the same lady who handled the move where we gained the Right ot Buy just four months later. The SAR copy however has the signature page intact, so they obviously left this out on purpose. The Stage One reply also contained a copy of a letter from a lady stating that we were declined the Right to Buy in 2004. It also contained a copy of the front page of the RTB2 but the rear was missing. The person who dealt with this stage was the managing director of our HA and he stated that it was unfortunate that the reason for the declination of the Right to BUy was not known. The SAR however mysteriously did not include the ladies letter but it did include a declination letter, dated to the same day, that was almost identical and signed by a gentleman. It also included a copy of both sides of the RTB2 and the person who declined us the Right to Buy just so happens to be the same person who granted us the Right to Buy one month later after an appeal. There is other material with regard to the valuation of the property and the offer price which will be going to the Housing Ombudsman. Looks to me like they are doctoring the material that they have used in their defence. There is a lot of continuity in the material with regard to the same people handling exchanges and decisions. It's funny as the lady who gave us the Right to Buy was a Housing Officer who dealt with this issue every day and the gentleman who overturned his own decision and granted us the Right to Buy following the appeal was Head of Property Services. They have still not provided the information they used to make their decisions whilst the material they have provided is either completely irrelevant or manipulated. Just hope the HO can see this.

Just checked the 'track and trace' for our SAR and the forty days expires on 18.06.16. Also checked their reply to it and their useless Complaints Officer has stated that it will be dealt with within 'forty working days'. Will be handing in the next letter on 20.06.16 which will give them another fourteen days to comply before we go to the ICO. The County Councillor is making a referral for us to the Housing Ombudsman so we should hear something soon. Then we can start our complaint with them. Dispite three letters, one of which was our Stage Three Complaint, and a phone call we have still not received any of the information we requested. Not even basic material like their Complaints Procedure, Customer Care Policy, Appeals Policy or Right to Buy Policy. They are absolutly useless.

Yes it states that we can go to the Housing Ombudsman and the SAR forty days expires on 14.06.16.

What a fun week. After having heard nothing from our HA I contacted them and enquired as to why none of the information we requested had been sent to us. It had been nine working days so I decided to chase it up. Their complaints officer was very unfriendly; no apology and she even suggested that I just download their complaints policy rather than her send it out. She then stated that they might breach the fifteen working days within which they have to reply. Absolute joke. Well, we sent in another letter requesting the information and pointing out the poor customer care. Today we received a letter that states that we will not have a hearing to put our case across as they have decided that we still do not have the Right to Buy. They have admitted, once again, that they made mistakes on our tenancy agreement. They state with regard to the requested information that they don't deem it 'relevant' with regard to the complaint. We are only requesting clarification on what they have stated, proof of what they are directly referencing and bog standeard policies. They have sent us nothing that we have requested. They did send out, yet again, a copy of a tenancy agreement from a past house where we have never stated we had the Right to Buy as we gained the Right to Buy when we moved. They know this yet they keep sending it out. They have have sent out some material from the LSVT Transfer Agreement which is not dated and references the Right to Buy and Preserved Right to Buy. There is no explanation for it and it seems to oddly confirm that we have the Right to Buy... The Right to Buy part is the same as that on our tenancy agreement while the PRTB states: 'shall mean the right to purchase a Dwelling conferred on former tenants of ******* ******** ******* by Sections 171A to 171H of the Housing Act 1985 (as amended) and the regulations made thereunder and (where appropriate) on their successors (inter alia) by Clause 5.9 of the Tanancy Agreement set out at Part II of the English Schedule of the Principal Agreement' Highlighted S125 if the Housing Act 1985. And Highlighted a part from this document, no date again, from page 8 that is titled 'Who Has the Right to Buy', Preserved Right to Buy': https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/your-right-to-buy-your-home-a-guide--2 This document was only first published in 2012 so what relevance does it have to a decision 16 years ago. Seems like a very odd selection of material. I will try to provide more clarification for anyone who requests it. Next stage, the Housing Ombudsman.

The rent goes on every Monday and this has been the case for as long as we have been with our HA. With regatd to when the rent is due, it states that it is due every Monday. In the sixteen years that we have been with them, a lot of which we have paid rent, we have never received a letter like this. Just odd that it was sent one day after they received the Stage Three escalation...