Tom seems confident on going to apeal and i think he will win the apeal and also force the banks now to reveal their true costs just look at hsbc first 1/4 they are making fortunes of our backs but i think the day will come when they will be seen like the good lord who went into the temple and overturned the scurilous moneylenders tables,The same will happen for all of us in the uk We shall overcome these profiteers i wonder if everyone should agree to stop paying the banks another penny ,estimated 2,000,000 people what would the banks say then ,i dont condone not paying what is rightfully owed but stop paying whilst we all have a dispute ,i think this would cause the banks immense problems .We have been far too leniant and too agreeable to the banks demands.Trust how can we trust an entity that is seemingly untouchable and not worthy of the claim that they act in good faith good faith to their shareholders not even in that department can they be trusted me having a rant gggrrrr banks

I am more and more shocked about how xenophobic England has become.dont worry too much over this its only the simple minds that are twisted by the racist thinking...

then proceed with your court action dont worry but dont accept the 12 unless it is only a partial acceptance with your right to claim the rest

Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (c. 52)

i have looked monty but the arguement still stands their is no reality of consent to process your data to another party when you are of the absolute beleif that your data being passed to a third party means the police(in cases of fraudulent behavior money laundering etc)the taxman for simmallar reasons,and the courts...I nor would you dream of my data being passed to anyone cepting the three mentionedand the court system already have the data through the courts,.also how do experian get the data do the banks sell it for profit or do experian profit from its use at your expense ie passing data then to a fourth party for profit (I use experian as an example)thus making the such data, proccessing companies have yet to be tested in the law courts .....you would also expect on the basis of your data being proccessed to the likes of the data receiving company that before publishing you would be furnished the evidence they have received from the banks to allow you the right to challenge such data as to its statement of truth if this data is published or passed to another party ie fourth party it may be tainted with malicious data ..false data ...inacurate data .this would render your reality of consent to be withdrawn until the default has been proven.by a judge,their is no way anyone could allow this to be acceptable it also makes the contract questionable due to undue influences ..unfair persuasion or error is not a product of mutual & voluntary consent.i could go on but as a right thinking person i dont want anyone knowing my details unless it is as beleived to be the third party under the prevention of fraud etc police taxman and judge, .

next time they ring leave the phone of the hook it ll cost them a bundle in call charges lol

just keep doing what you intended etc send your lba you can only be stayed by the judge or oft so carry on till you are told anything different .

i think this will be a case that will go to the law lords in no way would the public accept a climb down or a settlement below 3/4 pounds and it would also leave the door open for further cases to be tried in court

try this it follows on from what you are looking for also if they cannot produce the cca then their is no reality of consent to them processing your data s.10 Right to prevent processing likely to cause damage or distress.

which rufus lumley or thomas

hi peter wonder if you have ever looked at (reality of consent) i am looking at it with regards to cpw (carphone warehouse)trying to tell everyone they can dd your acount over the phone yes of course they can provided you receive the contract within your seven day period also i found out by accident they were charging me insurance seperately through another account by didrect debit but i have now set the argument with them that it was by deception and i was duped also the insurance is for theft i am housebound and only just started getting around my home and garden due to disablement so i think any telesales should be much more stricter in rules ...i am also asking my bank now to remove the offensive t&c of divulging information to a third party otherwise it will be deemed a null and void contract until the offending material is removed i do accept that the data protection act will allow for the police taxman and local courts havin the information on request but no other i have also asked the banks that any dd renewals for me to be informed first and any dd not personally signed and endorsed by me is not acceptable as i will tell all companies i deal with with regards to dd and also their t&c to remove the offending rule of sharing data i think if everyone did this it would create an example to the companies banks etc and also stop these dca from ruling the roost and thinking they are beyond the rule of law it also alows you time then to defend any type of claim lawfully

hoagy lands_ the next in line pure soul

...and i have also informed my bank i am unhappy about a term in the contract of divulging information to any third parties.except if it is the police and taxman & courts so i await their response reason being i did not know this clause was on the contract and i deem it is unfair as we all do who on earth would want to share their details with strangers unless it was through the courts

is rhere a reality of consent a meeting of minds no contract was posted to me all i got from them was a ficticious and supercharged bill following my complaint to them concerning this bill i then reilised im in trouble i cant really afford the bill so they gave me the option of accepting a couple of months credit they will charge the normal,i found this acceptable at the time cause it meant i did nt have to find all that money and i had accepted their origional excuse that i was now on a new contract and they must have made a mistake..during my conversation with them at that time i also asked what about the new phone you had promised ...he offered a lower rated phone than what i had..so i refused to accept this offer and keep the phone i have..then a few weeks later the penny dropped what new contract gggrrrr was i angry you bet so i phoned them temper gettin the best of me i then got my bill at the normal cept they were adding vat on the top making it approx 3.49 more expensive monthly and i also noticed a little statement on my visa and it said insurance (due to a long illness)i never checked these statements my wife did ,so when i seen it i phoned visa asked them what it was they informed me it was carphone gggrrrrr and it had been going out of my account since 2004 ggggrrr and ive been disabled since round about that time and did nt know i was insured...then it was nt insurance for sickness etc it was for theft lol as if i am housebound just started getting around on a wheel chair now and seeing things differently .so i stopped the monies as i said and informed cpw that i was going to issue sar notice so the made an offer to pay 2/3 of the insurance 104.00 .i am not satisfied with this because when i was argueing about the insurance i then looked at the circumstances surrounding this fiticious bill it was xmas or just after and as we all know the bills are piling in..but i then knew they had deceived me cause when they changed the bill they sent a document out i have it here the t & c no mention of insurance but as i say they deceived me into accepting this new contract without reilising they obtained my consent by trickery this is why i say their is and cannot be any reality of consent over the phone when you are being deceived....hope this explains things better that is why when trading standards come on monday morning i aint interested in compensation its the deceipt it was deliberate their was no mistake at cpw i strongly feel that if more people check their bills and suddenley find they have a almost triple the normal bill then check all the circumstances surrounding the bill were you duped...its about the most professional con i have ever witnessed

the agreement has not been updated nor amended cept to say they bounced three cheques whilst the account was in credit charged over 2000 pounds in intrest charges and sent me a libelous letter/fax from the bank rung my suppliers and basicly put me out of busines i had no choice but to bankrupt the company last i heard from them was 1992...........after all that i issued them with a notice giving them ten days in which i asked that they proceed with their court action if they wanted any monies for i was not prepared to discuss it farther until it was in court...ps before i forget my solicitor who was furnishing them with information weeks before i was privy to it was struck of and by the way most of my suppliers were in spain italy and some transport companies ..but efectively they deliberately put me out of busines ...i cannot act on any of this yet until i have undergone a few major operations and i get stressed every day thinking about this case its like a noose round my neck knowing they still have this deed on my property ..but after my operations i intend going for it but thanks a lot dave i will now study the data you have posted patrickq1

hi peter appreciate your reply thanks does anyone have a copy of section 82 of the 1974 act cause this is what the bank is relying on from a deed of assignment or so i thought thats what it was until i have looked at it now and it says its swb1019 revised december 1989 guarantee sterling and currencey it dose nt actually metion deed of assignment also its ltd to 20,000 but they drifted to 21,800 on the bank statements at the time so this is actually a guarantee sterling and currenceyby an individual or ltd co so what the hell have i signed up to ? they have not been in touch since oct 1993 since they are relying on this also in oct 1993 i challenged them to take me to court or forget it cause i wanted this case heard before a judge at the time ,bearing in mind i have a written libel letter here sent by the bank fax machine during the operation of the contract also they were frustrating the contract and my business at the same time hope someone has some knowledge patrickq1

does a bank not have an obligation (BANKERS OBLIGATIONS) not to proccess data to a third party cept for the taxman other banks and police,it seems all the data proccessing thats been going on for the last 15 years or so have taken a turn from being proccessed legally and fairly surely the likes of equifax(who own wescott)are now proccessing our data cannot be deemed legal unless the banks take the case to court is it not a case were the likes of wescot and equifax are abusing the law with the help from the banks who are also a major contributor for supplying illegal data or is their a specific law allowing this data to be sent to other parties without a court order and allowed to be in the public domain.its like going back to the early 18/19 century blacklisting and thrown off your land or property for debts

would like to ask peter if this is still relevant concerning the bankers i remember back to the 70s when you had to get a bank refferance for any type of business you where thinking of doing ie you used to have the bank make enquiries and also ask for bank references ,but in the 80s all this changed to reference agencies..so when did the BANKERS OBLIGATION NOT TO DISCLOSE unless it was through a sequestrator or police ? just a thought,you will find this section under NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS just thought you might know or be able to shed light on this and also with the banks including this right to confer with others your details surely this alone renders any contract voidable or void hope you can research this patrickq1

would it also be fair to think where the credit card company has entered a default against you to another company ie experian etc (who also would be in breach for receiving and publishing info) without going to court be a breach of contract/aggreement without useing the court procedures to comply with defaults just a thought cause i have three defaults entered when the payment where being met by the PPI insurance patrickq1

it would be nice to add the banner to our e mails this way the banks and dca know we mean business

If you did not sign a direct debit mandate then your bank should not have proccesed the direct debit the carphone warehouse use an irish company called NEW TECHNOLOGY INSURANCE...i have demanded from my bank a copy of this so called direct debit i want to find out just who sent it to the bank and who signed the mandate i also had a go at my bank for authorising it without my consent and also i am treating it as fraud ,and reading the thread from GERMANY2006 it is a fraudulent transaction taken without your written consent dont argue with carphone just get even patrickq1

Remove Default Notices on a Credit File - We show you how try this may hope it helps patrickq1

thanks bankfodder this means i can now resurect the nat west claim 1992 and also i like the STATEMENT OF TRUTH as i shall ask them for such a statement thanks patrickq

if they have offered any sort of settlement sounds like they are aware they are on shallow ground...i am about to begin serving papers fro their fraudulent actions it seems imdemic within this company and i really think it is time it ceased and they had their trading licence revoked i am awaiting trading standards report before i finnish with my findings then i will leave a report in here for people to contact me see my thread patrickq1

Dear Mr , Thank you for your email. I am glad to inform you that our Refunds Department authorised your refund appeal and the funds debited (£104.79) will be credited back into your bank account within the next 14 days. I wish you the best of luck with your upcoming hospital examination and I hope you are satisfied with the resolution of your refund complaint. If there's anything else we can do to help you please reply to this email. Regards Idris Lobinet Lifeline Customer Liaison ExecutiveDear Mr Neary, Thank you for your email. I am sorry that you are unhappy with the previous response. We are only able to refund you the amount quoted as we have proof that you disconnected your contract with your service provider on the 26th October 2005. We have explored all avenues to bring this issue into an amicable resolution and I am disappointed that you have decided to escalate this matter further and you are unhappy with our final resolution. We now consider this matter closed and if you would like to take this matter any further, you can contact the Financial Ombudsmen using the following: The Financial Ombudsman Service South Quay Plaza 183 Marsh Wall London E14 9SR Email Address: [email protected] I am sorry if the final resolution was not resolved to your satisfaction but I trust you can understand we are obliged to adhere to the terms and conditions of the policy. If there's anything else we can do to help you please reply to this email.