Natwest removed my default for a successful bank charges claim (well, on the basis I claimed charges back successfully, although the Default was placed years ago) Am in the process of getting one removed from Crap1 on the same basis.. although they have defaulted recently, and offered me a partial refund.. am hoping they remove it but I reckon it's going to be a battle

Well done What type of case was it? What were you after?

Subscribing. I am also in a battle with Next. I might copy your letter and send it to the Head Office!! :D The fact they have removed the data from the credit file is amazing, that's all I want

Great.. that's what I am looking for .. particulars Saw an excellent one somewhere but can't find it again! Most I have found are for defending, whereas I am going to initiate the claim. Can I use MCOL for this?

Thank you. Will have a good read. Also just realised they are in default of the 12+2 day rule for sending me a CCA. Although I sent them a S10 afterwards, and they responded to that saying they don't have to comply. Am quite confused. Do I file this on mcol - I am not after money though?!

I have had their final response, they told me the FOS wont be interested. I want to take them to Court over processing my data (adding a default). They haven't complied with the Data Protection S10 and say they don't have to. Where do I begin?

OK... Next have confirmed that this is their final response. So, do I push this in Court? They ARE going to refer it to a DCA, which I don't want.

I think I will do that. Interesting about FOS being damaging. Bloody nightmare this! I posted in the legal section which is where I got the advice to reply - it is titled About them not complying with Section 10. In work at the moment so struggling to get much done on this!

Well they are not following the CCA regulations, so I can't say how they can say it is acceptable for them to process my data! Would you take that as a final response letter then? Their last comments? Apparently the FOS wont deal with the complaint, should I wish to complain to them because I took it out after April 2007. I don't believe that for one minute!! I think I need a thread on how to take them to Court. Sod it, I am annoyed with them now.

Thanks Blind. I think I am going to pay a substantial amount off the balance, get their final response from the matter, and then take it to Court. I hope the Judge will view me favourably because I am actually paying it.. and Next get in trouble for not following the LAW!!! What do you think? Will you help me build a case?

I sent this back. Ms Thank you for your recent email. I would like to raise two issues. SCHEDULE 1 The data protection principles Part I The principles 1 Personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully and, in particular, shall not be processed unless— (a) at least one of the conditions in Schedule 2 is met, and (b) in the case of sensitive personal data, at least one of the conditions in Schedule 3 is also met. SCHEDULE 3 Conditions relevant for purposes of the first principle: processing of sensitive personal data 1 The data subject has given his explicit consent to the processing of the personal data. 2 (1) The processing is necessary for the purposes of exercising or performing any right or obligation which is conferred or imposed by law on the data controller in connection with employment. (2) The Secretary of State may by order— (a) exclude the application of sub-paragraph (1) in such cases as may be specified, or (b) provide that, in such cases as may be specified, the condition in sub-paragraph (1) is not to be regarded as satisfied unless such further conditions as may be specified in the order are also satisfied. 3 The processing is necessary— (a) in order to protect the vital interests of the data subject or another person, in a case where— (i) consent cannot be given by or on behalf of the data subject, or (ii) the data controller cannot reasonably be expected to obtain the consent of the data subject, or (b) in order to protect the vital interests of another person, in a case where consent by or on behalf of the data subject has been unreasonably withheld. 4 The processing— (a) is carried out in the course of its legitimate activities by any body or association which— (i) is not established or conducted for profit, and (ii) exists for political, philosophical, religious or trade-union purposes, (b) is carried out with appropriate safeguards for the rights and freedoms of data subjects, © relates only to individuals who either are members of the body or association or have regular contact with it in connection with its purposes, and (d) does not involve disclosure of the personal data to a third party without the consent of the data subject. 5 The information contained in the personal data has been made public as a result of steps deliberately taken by the data subject. 6 The processing— (a) is necessary for the purpose of, or in connection with, any legal proceedings (including prospective legal proceedings), (b) is necessary for the purpose of obtaining legal advice, or © is otherwise necessary for the purposes of establishing, exercising or defending legal rights. 7 (1) The processing is necessary— (a) for the administration of justice, (b) for the exercise of any functions conferred on any person by or under an enactment, or © for the exercise of any functions of the Crown, a Minister of the Crown or a government department. (2) The Secretary of State may by order— (a) exclude the application of sub-paragraph (1) in such cases as may be specified, or (b) provide that, in such cases as may be specified, the condition in sub-paragraph (1) is not to be regarded as satisfied unless such further conditions as may be specified in the order are also satisfied. 8 (1) The processing is necessary for medical purposes and is undertaken by— (a) a health professional, or (b) a person who in the circumstances owes a duty of confidentiality which is equivalent to that which would arise if that person were a health professional. (2) In this paragraph “medical purposes” includes the purposes of preventative medicine, medical diagnosis, medical research, the provision of care and treatment and the management of healthcare services. 9 (1) The processing— (a) is of sensitive personal data consisting of information as to racial or ethnic origin, (b) is necessary for the purpose of identifying or keeping under review the existence or absence of equality of opportunity or treatment between persons of different racial or ethnic origins, with a view to enabling such equality to be promoted or maintained, and © is carried out with appropriate safeguards for the rights and freedoms of data subjects. (2) The Secretary of State may by order specify circumstances in which processing falling within sub-paragraph (1)(a) and (b) is, or is not, to be taken for the purposes of sub-paragraph (1)© to be carried out with appropriate safeguards for the rights and freedoms of data subjects. 10 The personal data are processed in circumstances specified in an order made by the Secretary of State for the purposes of this paragraph. My conclusion is, that it is not enough for Next Director to rely on Schedule 2, as the data is financial data and is therefore "sensitive data" so you are required to meet at least one requirement of Schedule 3, which you cannot without me giving my explicit consent, which I did not. Also, the quote from (Wilson V First County Trust 2003) is highly selective, the text of the judgment also states that where an agreement is unenforceable at law, you may not use common law to avoid this, which is what you are suggesting.

Many thanks! Let's see what they come back with

My response (what you have basically said)! Thank you for your recent email. I would like to raise two issues. SCHEDULE 1 The data protection principles Part I The principles 1 Personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully and, in particular, shall not be processed unless— (a) at least one of the conditions in Schedule 2 is met, and (b) in the case of sensitive personal data, at least one of the conditions in Schedule 3 is also met. SCHEDULE 3 Conditions relevant for purposes of the first principle: processing of sensitive personal data 1 The data subject has given his explicit consent to the processing of the personal data. 2 (1) The processing is necessary for the purposes of exercising or performing any right or obligation which is conferred or imposed by law on the data controller in connection with employment. (2) The Secretary of State may by order— (a) exclude the application of sub-paragraph (1) in such cases as may be specified, or (b) provide that, in such cases as may be specified, the condition in sub-paragraph (1) is not to be regarded as satisfied unless such further conditions as may be specified in the order are also satisfied. 3 The processing is necessary— (a) in order to protect the vital interests of the data subject or another person, in a case where— (i) consent cannot be given by or on behalf of the data subject, or (ii) the data controller cannot reasonably be expected to obtain the consent of the data subject, or (b) in order to protect the vital interests of another person, in a case where consent by or on behalf of the data subject has been unreasonably withheld. 4 The processing— (a) is carried out in the course of its legitimate activities by any body or association which— (i) is not established or conducted for profit, and (ii) exists for political, philosophical, religious or trade-union purposes, (b) is carried out with appropriate safeguards for the rights and freedoms of data subjects, © relates only to individuals who either are members of the body or association or have regular contact with it in connection with its purposes, and (d) does not involve disclosure of the personal data to a third party without the consent of the data subject. 5 The information contained in the personal data has been made public as a result of steps deliberately taken by the data subject. 6 The processing— (a) is necessary for the purpose of, or in connection with, any legal proceedings (including prospective legal proceedings), (b) is necessary for the purpose of obtaining legal advice, or © is otherwise necessary for the purposes of establishing, exercising or defending legal rights. 7 (1) The processing is necessary— (a) for the administration of justice, (b) for the exercise of any functions conferred on any person by or under an enactment, or © for the exercise of any functions of the Crown, a Minister of the Crown or a government department. (2) The Secretary of State may by order— (a) exclude the application of sub-paragraph (1) in such cases as may be specified, or (b) provide that, in such cases as may be specified, the condition in sub-paragraph (1) is not to be regarded as satisfied unless such further conditions as may be specified in the order are also satisfied. 8 (1) The processing is necessary for medical purposes and is undertaken by— (a) a health professional, or (b) a person who in the circumstances owes a duty of confidentiality which is equivalent to that which would arise if that person were a health professional. (2) In this paragraph “medical purposes” includes the purposes of preventative medicine, medical diagnosis, medical research, the provision of care and treatment and the management of healthcare services. 9 (1) The processing— (a) is of sensitive personal data consisting of information as to racial or ethnic origin, (b) is necessary for the purpose of identifying or keeping under review the existence or absence of equality of opportunity or treatment between persons of different racial or ethnic origins, with a view to enabling such equality to be promoted or maintained, and © is carried out with appropriate safeguards for the rights and freedoms of data subjects. (2) The Secretary of State may by order specify circumstances in which processing falling within sub-paragraph (1)(a) and (b) is, or is not, to be taken for the purposes of sub-paragraph (1)© to be carried out with appropriate safeguards for the rights and freedoms of data subjects. 10 The personal data are processed in circumstances specified in an order made by the Secretary of State for the purposes of this paragraph. My conclusion is, that it is not enough for Next Directory to rely on Schedule 2, as the data is financial data and is therefore "sensitive data" so you are required to meet at least one requirement of Schedule 3, which you cannot without me giving my explicit consent, which I did not. Also, the quote from (Wilson V First County Trust 2003) is highly selective, the text of the judgment also states that where an agreement is unenforceable at law, you may not use common law to avoid this, which is what you are suggesting. Kindest Regards So lets see what I get back from that

Hiya Thanks for your swift reply! So what shall I send them in return? I see this is going to end up in Court isn't it!

Our Ref: Dear I write further to your most recent email regarding your Next Directory account. Firstly I would like to advise that I have sought legal advice regarding your concerns since you first contacted us. You state that Next do not have a contract for your account and are unable to assign the debt to a third party. To explain, a contract is accepted by a customer once an order is placed with us. Therefore, as you have neither denied ordering nor receiving the goods, a contract does exist between us and you. With regards to your comments that the account “is being prepared for sale to an external Debt Collection Agency who post this sale will legally own the debt”, I can advise that this is standard industry practice and Next are within their right to do this. Whilst a signed copy of the credit agreement is not available for your account, the company who your account will be passed onto will be fully aware of this. Furthermore the lack of a signed agreement simply means that the agreement is unenforceable except on order of the court. The agreement is not void or unlawful (Wilson V First County Trust 2003). Turning now to your notes regarding the processing of your data, you have asked for us to provide strict documentary evidence stating consent was granted. There is no legal requirement to do this and the Data Protection Act 1998 makes clear that consent to process data does not have to be in writing. Consent can be implied or inferred by actions. It is a requirement to provide you with a fair processing notice i.e. details of the processing that would take place if you placed an order and opened an account. This was provided to you and Next are satisfied that this can be proved to a court should it be necessary. Finally, as you will be aware under Section 10 (3) of the Data Protection Act, a Data Controller has 21 days in which to indicate whether he accepts a data subject notice or whether he refuses it and his grounds for doing so. I can therefore formally respond to your data subject notice by confirming that Next will not be making the amendments you request and that we rely on the exemptions made in Schedule 2 (section 6) of the Data Protection Act 1998 for this. Therefore we will continue to share your payment records with the agencies. Please note I have enclosed a full copy of our complaints procedure, which includes details of how to contact the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS). However, FOS cannot decide upon the enforceability of the credit agreement as it was entered into prior to April 2007. By way of explanation, the FOS can only consider cases about events that have occurred after 6th April 2007, and not simply complaints made after this date, in relation to incidents that have occurred prior. I have also arranged for a copy of the default notice to be sent to you as you have requested. I hope my explanation to each of your comments resolves your concerns and finally brings this matter to a close, although if you wish to refer your complaint to any other external bodies, this is of course your prerogative. With kind regards, You can also contact the Customer Relations Management Team at Desford Road, Enderby, Leicester, LE19 4AT. Telephone: 0844 844 8315. Complaints Handling Procedure Next welcomes and learns from complaints and our aim is to deal with all complaints speedily and sympathetically, and all complaints are logged, investigated and responded to. Financial Complaints Next has made provision for:- · Each complaint to be investigated by an employee who was not directly involved in the matter which is the subject of the complaint. · Where Next decides that redress is appropriate, fair compensation will be provided for any acts or remissions for which it is responsible. However, appropriate redress will not always involve financial redress. It may, for example, simply involve an apology. · Next will provide written acknowledgement of a complaint within 5 working days of receipt, giving the name and job title of the individual handling the complaint. · Next will endeavour to resolve complaints at the earliest possible stage. · Within 4 weeks of receiving a complaint, Next will provide either:- (i) a final response, or (ii) a holding response, which will explain why we are not in a position to resolve the complaint and indicate when further contact will be made, which must be within 8 weeks of receipt of the complaint. · Within 8 weeks of receiving a complaint, Next will provide either:- (i) a final response, or (ii) a response which:- (a) explains that we are still not in a position to make the final response, giving reasons for the further delay and indicating when we expect to be able to provide a final response, and (b) to advise that the complaint can be referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service if you are unhappy with the delay. · The final response will inform you how to refer to the Financial Ombudsman Service if you are dissatisfied with the final response and that you must do so within 6 months. · Next will ensure that an explanatory leaflet from the Financial Ombudsman Service is enclosed with the final response, unless this has previously been sent to you. · Next will retain records of complaints for a minimum period of 3 years from the date of receipt of the complaint. · Next will fully comply with the Financial Ombudsman Service in the handling of complaints against the company.

Dear I write further to your most recent email regarding your Next Directory account. Firstly I would like to advise that I have sought legal advice regarding your concerns since you first contacted us. You state that Next do not have a contract for your account and are unable to assign the debt to a third party. To explain, a contract is accepted by a customer once an order is placed with us. Therefore, as you have neither denied ordering nor receiving the goods, a contract does exist between us and you. With regards to your comments that the account “is being prepared for sale to an external Debt Collection Agency who post this sale will legally own the debt”, I can advise that this is standard industry practice and Next are within their right to do this. Whilst a signed copy of the credit agreement is not available for your account, the company who your account will be passed onto will be fully aware of this. Furthermore the lack of a signed agreement simply means that the agreement is unenforceable except on order of the court. The agreement is not void or unlawful (Wilson V First County Trust 2003). Turning now to your notes regarding the processing of your data, you have asked for us to provide strict documentary evidence stating consent was granted. There is no legal requirement to do this and the Data Protection Act 1998 makes clear that consent to process data does not have to be in writing. Consent can be implied or inferred by actions. It is a requirement to provide you with a fair processing notice i.e. details of the processing that would take place if you placed an order and opened an account. This was provided to you and Next are satisfied that this can be proved to a court should it be necessary. Finally, as you will be aware under Section 10 (3) of the Data Protection Act, a Data Controller has 21 days in which to indicate whether he accepts a data subject notice or whether he refuses it and his grounds for doing so. I can therefore formally respond to your data subject notice by confirming that Next will not be making the amendments you request and that we rely on the exemptions made in Schedule 2 (section 6) of the Data Protection Act 1998 for this. Therefore we will continue to share your payment records with the agencies. Please note I have enclosed a full copy of our complaints procedure, which includes details of how to contact the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS). However, FOS cannot decide upon the enforceability of the credit agreement as it was entered into prior to April 2007. By way of explanation, the FOS can only consider cases about events that have occurred after 6th April 2007, and not simply complaints made after this date, in relation to incidents that have occurred prior. I have also arranged for a copy of the default notice to be sent to you as you have requested. I hope my explanation to each of your comments resolves your concerns and finally brings this matter to a close, although if you wish to refer your complaint to any other external bodies, this is of course your prerogative. With kind regards,

Your image has been removed from photobucket?

I am not disputing I owe them money. I am disputing I gave them my signature to place information on my credit file.

One guy on here had 9 removed with a stern letter... only one left for him to work on, but he says its going to be a tough one to get removed

Subscribing - I shall be sending Capital One a similar letter I think. Well done - now work on getting your Default removed

Hmm this is the most important Default to get removed to me. I am annoyed that even when you make payments, it STILL gives the Default at a horribly large amount I am waiting in vain for a letter that is going to rectify this, what I need is a final response so I can take them to Court I suppose. And God help me if I lose

She has been very nice dealing with me the lady, respect to her I hate tying her in knots over the phone and she did promise to send me a default notice! I am wondering what they could send me though, that a legal team would need to check? I asked why she didn't have a generic letter to send me as a standard response and she confirmed that they didn't do that. As I said to her, it is pointless me entering into any agreement with Next when I could satisfy the balance for much less of a cost with a DCA. My question is this : Can I take them to Court over passing my details to credit reference agents, thus blacklisting me... I am not disputing that I owe them this money. Or would that be a problem?

Next have replied to my letter, it will be sent tomorrow. God knows what could be in it, she said the legal team were confirming the drafting was OK to send. Then it will be sent tomorrow.

So what does this mean though? Do they tell you you don't have to pay? What about your details on the credit file? Are they still there? How are they showing?!

I agree with Supasnooper. If the choice is you will gain a CCJ by default, and you could lose in Court and gain a CCJ anyways. I would go to Court, and at least try and fight them Good luck