Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×
Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Benbane_Head

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    15

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral
  1. Benbane_Head
    just sent some stuff over by email.
  2. Benbane_Head
    Will send them to you in the evening leaving work now....
  3. Benbane_Head
    I don't know of any other cases and I assume neither did Equifax's Counsel (or at least not favouring them). As HHJ Thornton said "Mr Smeaton's claim raises novel issues under section 13 of the DPA 1998. He brings his claim additionally as a claim for damages for negligence and this claim too raises novel issues." Customs and Excise Commissioners v Barclays Bank Plc [2006] UKHL 28, [2007] 1 A.C. 181 worth checking out but I haven't had a look at it. All I can see is Appeal Outstanding - so this should be viewed with caution.
  4. Benbane_Head
    DonkeyB, I agree with what you said. I would doubt you could carry on paying £1 and getting away with it - may be once but the point is that even with that figure the SD would technically become faulty. If there is a debt which is disputed, it will be difficult to get through with the Insolvency court as these are not there to decide on disputes.
  5. Benbane_Head
    Hi timewarp3, If you need any case law/statute/legal commentary etc which is not available, just let me know as I can get them in click.
  6. Benbane_Head
    A statutory demand is nothing till it is served, after which you get 21 days to pay it off or dispute the debt. If you dispute the debt, or pay a small amount towards the SD, the SD becomes worthless and you can actually apply to the court saying that the amount claimed is disputed and the SD will nicely be quashed. At least you can find something in it to have it disputed. Make no contact with them before you have served it. This is plain scaremongering and you can get plenty of help here. The least you can do is find a reason to dispute it. May it be by paying a £1 towards it before the end of the 21 day period.
  7. Benbane_Head
    The main problem Equifax faced in this case was this: They took bankruptcy data from the London Gazette (for profit, in the course of business) and was reporting Mr. Smeaton as a Bankrupt. Soon after they took the Bankruptcy data, the Bankruptcy was, by consent of both parties (i.e. Mr. Smeaton and the claimant in that case), rescinded - which means it was void ab-initio - as if it never happened. Because Equifax failed to act or do anything to correct this and Mr. Smeaton not even aware of this, kept being declined for personal and business credit till he found out in 2006. Back in 2001/2002, there was no onus on the Official Receiver to publish the rescission in the London Gazette, because there was nothing to report - the bankruptcy was void ab-initio. Since 2008, the system has all been electronic and the OR's electronic files are fed directly onto Equifax's computers and everything is automatically updated, or so Equifax claims. Username44, it would even be worse if they picked your bankruptcy from Belfast Gazette and then failed to pick up or update the discharge. The main point here is that they supply data and information to the financial industry as part of their business and for profit. If they keep showing you bankrupt when you are not, they should also be liable for the loss that they cuase you!
  8. Benbane_Head
    I can't send PM's till I have 30 posts:( will need to do something else... Unless you want to give me your email address in which case I can re-send them to you. Cheers!!
  9. Benbane_Head
    I sent you some info on the cases, but can't see them in my sent items? did you receive it?
  10. Benbane_Head
    It is good stuff... and there is potential to kick some ass before claims become statute barred . Although we have to be mindful of the appeal which is under process!! I am keeping an eye on the developments and will keep everyone posted...
  11. Benbane_Head
    Kpoharor v Woolwich Building Society 1995 Citation (1995) Times, 8 December. Hearing Date 08 December 1995 Court Court of Appeal. Judge Evans and Waite LJJ, and Sir John May. Summary The issue arose whether a bank’s customer who was not a trader was entitled to recover substantial rather than nominal damages for loss of business reputation when his cheque was wrongly dishonoured by the bank. Held, the credit rating of an individual was as important for his personal transactions, including mortgages, hire purchase and banking facilities, as it was for a person engaged in trade. In either case there was a presumption of some injury when his cheque was dishonoured by his bank. In such circumstances, an individual could obtain substantial rather than nominal damages in contract for loss of business reputation. There was no binding authority for the proposition that substantial damages were only available if special facts were proved which were known by the bank when the contract was made.
  12. Benbane_Head
    Have a read of Section 13: 13 Compensation for failure to comply with certain requirements. (1)An individual who suffers damage by reason of any contravention by a data controller of any of the requirements of this Act is entitled to compensation from the data controller for that damage. (2)An individual who suffers distress by reason of any contravention by a data controller of any of the requirements of this Act is entitled to compensation from the data controller for that distress if— (a)the individual also suffers damage by reason of the contravention, or (b)the contravention relates to the processing of personal data for the special purposes. (3)In proceedings brought against a person by virtue of this section it is a defence to prove that he had taken such care as in all the circumstances was reasonably required to comply with the requirement concerned. But also see if the DPA principles allow them a valid defence. It is in the schedules, but can't remember which one. Then also consider any common law negligence if you think no valid defence can apply!!
  13. Benbane_Head
    you can after you have done 10 posts:), which I see you now have!!
  14. Benbane_Head
    Agreed... Although not many people think about the fact that the CRA's can be sued in negligence too. This is the first of its kind in England & Wales, although one other case in Canada. On another note, Section 13 of DPA can be freely used against others too. Again, it has only been used on 2 other occasions, so it would be nice to see it being used more!!
  15. Benbane_Head
    I have come across this recent case Smeaton v Equifax, accessible for free on bailii. It has been decided that where a credit reference agency has not been complying with their continuing obligation of retaining accurate data, they will be in breach of the Data Protection Act, Section 13. Furthermore, if they have been negligently, by positive acts or omissions, showing wrong information about a data subject, the CRA's would be negligent and can be sued in negligence to reclaim any losses the data subject may have suffered. The CRA's have lost it to a litigant in person, and have now appealed it in the Court of Appeal, but it goes to show that if there are people who have suffered because of these people, you may be able to sue them. One point to note is about limitation. Cheers!! **Any information given here is not to be considered legal advice and should not be relied upon. Benbane Head does not accept any liability to the recipient or any third party for any loss suffered as a result of reliance on the information provided herein.**

Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...