Jump to content

roydosan

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    118
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by roydosan

  1. Yes, claim for the charges and the interest they charged you on the fees that is correct - but you cannot claim for a higher rate of interest which they didn't charge you. Then if it comes to court you add on the 8% interest on combined fees & interest on fees.
  2. Glenn, I don't see how this works out - you can only claim the money in interest that they have actually charged you - as you are claiming interest at the higher rate that means that if it went to court and you claimed the 8% (I know you said you could omit this if claiming for a higher rate but this sounds like unproven territory to me) you would effectively be charging them twice for taking your money. The 8% is the compensation for taking your money illegally - you don't claim compensation in the initial request with the list of charges and interest charged. If you do so it could be interpreted as being deceitful. Added to that if you arbitrarily add any extra on top of what they charged you I can't see it standing up in court. Also Barclaycard do not have an unauthorised borrowing interest rate. If they did it would have to be mentioned on either the statements or the letters - they cannot hide it.
  3. Glenn, you cannot claim more than they have charged you. There is not an unauthorised overlimit rate - only the standard rate which goes on your total balance.
  4. No - as long as they reply with the info within 40 days. I'd send all your letters by recorded delivery and then they can't claim it got lost in the post.
  5. No it would be the standard rate that appears on your statement. If there was an unauthorised rate they would have to advise you of it so I don't think there is one and I've certainly never seen one mentioned in any of the paperwork from Barclaycard.
  6. Went through my paperwork last night and found not only the statement from October 99 with the fine but also a letter from the same month. It reads: "I have still not received a reply to my previous letter and you are still behind with your payments. Therefore, as advised, a £20 fee has been charged to your account." Doesn't look like an annual fee to me!
  7. Not really - can't see how an annual charge would be called an "out of order fee" but I'll double check. I am unable to locate a scanner so if anyone wants to see it PM me with an address and I'll post you a photocopy.
  8. Should I refer to a 'fiduciary relationship' in the preliminary letter or does that just apply for banks? (getting everything ready for expiry of the DPA....)
  9. It's been 36 days since my DPA letter arrived at MBNA and still I've heard nothing - not even an acknowledgment. Anyone else had them take so long/longer before replying?
  10. Can you claim for costs in the small claims court though?
  11. roydosan

    Interest rates

    The 8% is what you add on when you make a court claim - don't get it mixed up with the interest charged on your fines!!!
  12. I was charged an "Out of Order Fee" of £20 by Barclaycard in October 99 so what they are saying is incorrect. I still have the statement and they definitely did charge it to my account.
  13. Sorry but I think they may be mistaken: "The narrow definition of a relevant manually filing system was applied in Johnson v Medical Defence Union [2004] EWHC 347 (Ch). Laddie J. said (ibid [34]) that there 'must be ready access...The data controller's employees must be able to identify relevant data at the outset with reasonable certainty and speed and without having to make a manual search'. The end result is that save in cases where there are very sophisticated indices,manual records of paper documents and microfiche records of paper documents are outside the scope of the Data Protection Act. He rejected the argument that information that is recorded as part of a relevant filing system retains its status as 'personal data' once it is removed from the relevant filing system by the data controller." data protection
  14. Sorry Tamadus but I don't think that will make any difference: "The narrow definition of a relevant manually filing system was applied in Johnson v Medical Defence Union [2004] EWHC 347 (Ch). Laddie J. said (ibid [34]) that there 'must be ready access...The data controller's employees must be able to identify relevant data at the outset with reasonable certainty and speed and without having to make a manual search'. The end result is that save in cases where there are very sophisticated indices,manual records of paper documents and microfiche records of paper documents are outside the scope of the DPA. He rejected the argument that information that is recorded as part of a relevant filing system retains its status as 'personal data' once it is removed from the relevant filing system by the data controller." data protection I don't think the Inland Revenue would be bound by the DPA in the same way as those making a Subject Access Request.
  15. That won't work - microfiche is not a relevant filing system under the terms of the Data Protection Act. This was decided in the Johnson Vs MDU case where the judge ruled that the DPA did not apply to records stored on microfiche.
  16. Shellevans, no it does not mean that unfortunately - case law has decided this - microfiche is not a relevant filing system. I may be mistaken but as the judge has interpreted and ruled in this way it would take an act of parliament to overturn it. I don't see anyway round it.
  17. No it won't work - a judge ruled in the Johnson Vs MDU case that microfiche was not a relevant filing system according to the terms of the Data Protection Act -therefore Barclaycard are, unfortunately, well within their rights to refuse to provide such information in response to a DPA Special Access Request.
  18. Barclaycard are correct about microfiche not being 'a relevant filing system' - this was determined in a previous legal case where the judge ruled that microfiche was not a relevant filing system for the purposes of the data protection act.
  19. The charge is listed on my October 99 statement as an 'Out of Order Fee' of £20. They are right about one thing - it was bang out of order!
  20. Yeah sure. should I e-mail it to you?
  21. I have produced a spreadsheet in excel which calculates compound interest on fees for credit cards. It work well and accurately but needs a bit of care to make sure the data is entered correctly.
  22. Two for £10 - Barclays Bank & Barclaycard should be treated as two separate organisations.
×
×
  • Create New...