davey77
-
Posts
2,650 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Post article
CAGMag
Blogs
Keywords
Posts posted by davey77
-
-
I don't see you would need to take any steps tango34. If you are not watching a tv signal as it is broadcast and not visiting BBC wesbite for live tv then you are not required to have a license.
I personally would send them (when you are ready) a recorded delivery letter stating your position and the reason why you will not be watching tv any more, thanking them for post broadcasts and 'wishing them luck in reversing the trend of inane and patronising programs.. and leave it at that. You are not actually required to inform them that you no longer wish to receive their service. Just cancel it like you would with BT or Orange.
I'd love to try that one day (but my old mum needs her tv).
All you will get is what this guy has: Letters from BBC Television Licensing/intro (although i would take them to Court myself long before i started getting more than a couple of letters like he has received on the grounds of Fraud.) One day...
-
Usual tactic not to cash sar or CCA payments thereby trying to cut down on the paper trail (proof of your requests). They have received the request (recorded hopefully) therefore what they do with the money is their problem.
I always used to be hung up on hoping they would cash the cheque in the early days but really it doesn't matter. Your requests are in, they have a time limit and if they fail then you report them. Done.
-
Can't believe how many threats of a home visit i have had the last 3 years and still nobody has arrived.
Don't worry about it.
-
-
-
I find it quite amusing that all communication from the FOS, ICO, OFT, TS, appear to start off advising us they are snowed under with work.
So, you are no further forward really are you ?
True.. makes you wonder.. it's a great excuse not to launch an immediate investigation: "Sorry, snowed under, will do it one day tho".
No further foward no. No contact from NCO/RMA. TS told me to get stuffed and i haven't bothered to reply to them. Was all geared up for it but i have lots on at the mo (for different reasons) and for now really only need to spend time writing letters that are either going to have an effect or get a positive result. Therefore the stinking useless and cowardly TS are at the bottom of the list.
I am considering this for any further DCAs via amex to save some time until such time that i.. A. Start Court action or B. Get a Solicitor to take them all the way to Court:
Dear DCA
-
Hmmm good that they'll process it as soon as you fill in the form and send it back but is it just me that feels they dont really know what securitisation is and hence dont know if its applicable to the act?
S.
Or worse.. my first thought was that the ICO want to calculate what the potential profit lose for the creditors could be before giving an answer.
As we know, most of the aims of the so called regulatory bodies (ICO, FSA, FOS TS etc) is to protect their powerful cousins in big business against massive loss. With this as an example... why need a specific case? The question is actually quite straight forward after all?
Perhaps i am paranoid.. i will send the complaint off along with a copy of the email and we shall see what the response is....
-
davey77 posted this on his own thread, I thought it was relevant to this dicussion.
I have had a response from the ICO to the question sent to them (post 11 of this thread).
"Case Reference Number **********
Dear Mr *
Thank you for your correspondence dated 21 May 2009, regarding whether information about an account that has been part of a securitisation pool would be classed as personal data. I apologise for the delay in replying to you which was due to the large volume of correspondence that the office is currently handling. This has meant that we have not been able to reply as promptly as we would have wished.
Under the Data Protection Act,
personal data means data which relate to a living individual who can be identified:-
(a) from those data, or
(b) from those data and other information which is in the possession of, or is likely to come into the possession of, the data controller
However, we would need further information before we could give you a definitive answer on whether such information would be classed as personal data in this case. Therefore, we would advise you to make a subject access request to the organisation for the information in the first instance. If you have already done so and have received a response from the organisation, we would ask you to complete and return a copy of our complaint form together with a copy of your correspondence with the organisation. We can then investigate the matter and provide you with a fuller response.
To help us deal with your returned complaint form as quickly as possible, please reply to this email, being careful not to amend the information in the subject field, sending the form as an attachment. Please quote the above case reference number in all future correspondence about this matter. Failure to do so may delay the processing of your complaint.
As we cannot progress your enquiry/complaint without the information we have asked for it will now be closed until you return the form to us.
If you require any further advice or assistance please contact our Helpline on 01625 545745.
Yours sincerely
Caroline Thompson
Case Officer
DP Case Reception Unit"
-
Hi everyone
Does anyone have any amex letters sent from Fort Lauderdale Florida
with a note on the back of the envelope stating
"if undelivered return to PO Box 297810 Ft Lauderdale, Fl 33329-7810 Please do not send correspondance to this address" or-
PO Box 297823 FT Lauderdale, Fl 33329-7823 Please do not send correspondance to this address"
One envelope had the monthly Amex bill in With a American Express Services Europe Ltd Department 671 Brighton BN88 1AH England bill address inside, the other had-
Using an American Exress with chip and pin is as easy as1234 with the chip & pin number in the envelope with an address of American Express Services Europe Ltd PO Box 70 Brighton BN88 1AH England .
This one on the front of the envelope has INTL Priority Airmail. US POSTAGE PAID FT LAUDERDALE FL. PERMIT NO 4497
Any thoughts
Regards castella
Think they just have different depts depending on what subject they are writing to you about. I have had those Ft Laudersale ones too.
-
Hi DD.. been away from the computer for a couple of days and just catching up.
In line with the securitisation i sent the following email to the ICO:
"I would be grateful for the ICO's views on requests for certain information under the Data Protection Act. Specifically in relation to a Subject Access Request to a Creditor by a Consumer for information the Creditor holds regarding an account that has been part of a Securitisation pool or has, past or present, been passed to such a third partly under such a financial arrangement - namely a SVP as part of any securitisation process. In failing to supply information relating the Securitisation would the Creditor have breached a request under the DPA?
Given that such an arrangement for an account, although aggregated for this purpose, necessarily links back to an individual it seems clear that basic information as to whether or not a given account forms part of an outside (third party) securitisation pool by having been sold to an SPV would essentially be classed as personal data and therefore any such arrangement should be specified in reply to a Subject Access Request. Also, to assess if that account had been at some point transferred to countries without adequate protection, or not.
Thanks for your reply in advance.""
Had this response from the ICO today:
"Case Reference Number **********
Dear Mr *
Thank you for your correspondence dated 21 May 2009, regarding whether information about an account that has been part of a securitisation pool would be classed as personal data. I apologise for the delay in replying to you which was due to the large volume of correspondence that the office is currently handling. This has meant that we have not been able to reply as promptly as we would have wished.
Under the Data Protection Act,
personal data means data which relate to a living individual who can be identified:-
(a) from those data, or
(b) from those data and other information which is in the possession of, or is likely to come into the possession of, the data controller
However, we would need further information before we could give you a definitive answer on whether such information would be classed as personal data in this case. Therefore, we would advise you to make a subject access request to the organisation for the information in the first instance. If you have already done so and have received a response from the organisation, we would ask you to complete and return a copy of our complaint form together with a copy of your correspondence with the organisation. We can then investigate the matter and provide you with a fuller response.
To help us deal with your returned complaint form as quickly as possible, please reply to this email, being careful not to amend the information in the subject field, sending the form as an attachment. Please quote the above case reference number in all future correspondence about this matter. Failure to do so may delay the processing of your complaint.
As we cannot progress your enquiry/complaint without the information we have asked for it will now be closed until you return the form to us.
If you require any further advice or assistance please contact our Helpline on 01625 545745.
Yours sincerely
Caroline Thompson
Case Officer
DP Case Reception Unit"
-
Spartathisis... i think the penalty interest could technically only be called unlawful.. not outright illegal. Have you complained to the ICO re the missing pages at all? Can't seem to find anyone that has found the ICO to be helpful as yet
Thanks Angel...Appreciate anything you can add.
I'll catch your threads when you update them. My book seems to be consisting of ranting and raving at the moment and a couple of literary agents are not interested in the subject matter.. but then again JK Rowling was turned down 10 times before her book was taken up too!
-
First contact i have had from Link Financial (who bought the MBNA accounts) today in the form of a statement. No interest has been applied since being defaulted and no request for payment. Just a statement of account/s.
Last communication from them was an invalid default notice (the second one placed on those accounts) last september 2008.
No reply will be sent. I'll see if anything else turns up one day.
-
Still awaiting on the ICO complaint re the missing pages of the agreement. That could take a long while. In the mean time no replies to Cabot.. can't be bothered with them to be honest.
-
-
In future, no more calls.. Everything in writing only as proof of what was said. Hope it gets sorted for you.
-
If you want to reject that offer and go for the full amount then inform them that although the OFT may not have challenged the Banks right to apply a certain charge, the OFT, by the same token, has NOT giving permission to Charge £12 either.
I would adapt rev.ian's letter and amend to your own requirements, not forgetting to put that quote from the OFT:
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/royal-bank-scotland/187177-mint-pay-back-12-a.html
-
If you don't owe anyone money then send mercers and Barclays an LBA informing them of your intention to start legal proceedings against them for attempted fraud and Libel if they do not confirm in writing that your unlawful Default is removed along with an official apology. Tell them you will be asking for substantial damages to be awarded for defamation of character and the detriment a falsely applied Default has caused your financial standing.
Send it by recorded delivery and give them 14 days.
i would also write to the CRAs (although they never do anything without the lenders say so) informing them that they should remove the Default otherwise they could be placed as co-correspondent in any claim you may make in the County Court for Libel. (Copy any helpful correspondence you have received from Mercers/Barclays that backs up your position to to the CRAs.)
The CRAs won't actually do anything as they only do what they are told by the Lender. But they will (should) contact the lender for verification of the 'correct' data and therefore that will show Barclays you mean business.
-
I think i read if you put your caravan on land permanently you'll need planning permission and all that too.
-
If it seems to good to be true it probably is.
I keep my eye on cheaper properties that come on the market (even though i have no hope of buying one) and when you look into matter closely (usually to do with the area) you'll often find that Bagdad is a more peaceful location to move to!
Insurance could be a problem for non standard construction also getting a mortgage or a loan, even a small one, is hard enough when it's bricks and mortar let alone a pre-fab or caravan.
-
Looks like this Judge got it right:
Bank writes off man's debt just before court hearing - Ripon Today
-
Interesting to see what they say to that letter.. if, in fact you get a reply at all.
-
Very nice! I want one too!
Be interesting to see if they follow through removing data from the credit files. Hopefully they will and you'll be done and dusted. Job done.
-
Then look at this thread and fire off a CPR 31.16 to Mint.
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/173201-why-you-shouldnt-use.html
Should you get nonsense back from Intrum.. then send them a request also under CPR 31.16 (they tend to give up quickly so you may not hear from them again.)
-
I would throw back something along these lines to Intrum:
Account in dispute
I reference to your recent letter dated ***. The supply of unsigned generic terms and conditions may well be sufficient to comply with a creditor's duty under section 78 of the CCA1974 and i understand that the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1557) at Regulation 3 allow the Signature box and signature to be omitted in a copy document but the copy document must contain all the terms of the agreement contained within the signed executed original document.
You are still not entitled to enforce this disputed account because you have failed to produce a document signed by myself that contains the prescribed terms as per Section 61(a) and Section 127(3) of the CCA 1974.
As I am sure you are aware, when an agreement fails to include the Prescribed Terms as per Section 61(a) of the CCA 1974 then the agreement will be irredeemably unenforceable and as such i refer you to the decision in Wilson v Hurstanger (2007) EWCA Civ 299:
"...Schedule 6 is to ensure that, as an inflexible condition of enforceability, certain basic minimum terms are included which the parties (with the benefit of legal advice if necessary) and/or the court can identify within the four corners of the agreement. Those minimum provisions combined with the requirement under section 61 that all the terms should be in a single document, and backed up by the provisions of section 127(3), ensure that these core terms are expressly set out in the agreement itself: they cannot be orally agreed; they cannot be found in another document; they cannot be implied; and above all they cannot be in the slightest mis-stated. As a matter of policy the lender is denied any room for manoeuvre in respect of them."
This account is therefore in dispute. Neither Intrum Justitia or Mint(RBS) have complied within the strict requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 in being able to produce a signed credit card agreement containing the Prescribed Terms. I therefore must assume that no agreement exists and enforcement action is prohibited as you will be FULLY AWARE that any challenge to the agreement in court would require the signed copy of the original agreement to be produced.
Unless you can supply a Properly Executed and Original Agreement in relation to the above account no further communication will be entered into and any other correspondence received will be read and filled for future evidence as per advice from my Solicitor while i consider every option to remedy this dispute through the County Court.
Yours sincerely, gribzig
Tv License question....just curious
in General Consumer Issues
Posted
Still need a license for watching live internet broadcasts tho don't you conniff:
This page suggests that: BBC NEWS | Video and Audio | News Channel Live | BBC News Channel
"The BBC News channel is available in the UK only. Don't forget, to watch TV online as it's being broadcast, you still need a TV License"