Credit watch, is great in my opinion, it costs £7 monthly (we are with red 24 so we get it for £5) it is where you get an email or a text within 24 hours if there is any change to your credit file, the initial reason we signed up was we were subject to high value fraud, but I personally have found it really useful. If there is a change you just log on to your credit file and have a look what the change is. If there is no change within the month you still get an email informing you of this. here is the link Online Credit Reports and Credit Reporting from a Leading Credit Agency: Equifax hope this helps

Back in January, I noticed the Mackenzie Hall had helped themselves to search my credit file in my maiden name, (been married for 7 years now) had no idea why they helped themselves without my permission, and did not owe anything to anyone. I questioned Experian, whom contacted MH, they never responded to Experian, no surprise there really, Experian removed one of the searches. I reported MH to the Information Commissioners Office and they have not responded to their requests, however the ICO started getting heavy with MH and MH admitted that they did not know why they conducted these 2 searches LOL... Well the ICO are not happy and have taken it further, here is the email I received from the ICO yesterday...funny though MH have obviously instructed Experian to remove these searches because (i have credit watch) they have been removed. LOL Here is the email from the ICO: Reference RFAXXX Dear XXXXX Further to my previous correspondence I have now received a response from Mackenzie hall in which they have confirmed that they have searched their systems using the information I had provided (your name and address) and they cannot locate the account in order to look into this matter further. This response only serves to confirm the fact that Mackenzie Hall should never have searched your credit reference file in the first place. I am very concerned that this company has been unable to offer any kind of explanation for why they carried out these searches on your credit file. With this in mind the decision has now been taken to refer this case to our Regulatory Action Division for further investigation. Yours sincerely Laura Hennessy Casework and Advice Officer

I love the replies, Tom I will be sending the letter this week than you so much,of course I will post their reply..if they do reply And we forgot to add, in one of their scary letters they said I applied for the so called CCJ to be set aside in November 1993, which they claimed was refused.... GPB if you are reading this you are BRASTWARDS, you should be ashamed of yourselves calling yourselves Solicitors... On a serious note, am I entitled to a refund, or some compensation LOL I would love to make a DCA pay ME some money.

Thanks for the replies LFI As said in this thread earlier, even though this debt is 13/14 years old, I never recall it ever going to court, I know I am a doddering old fart, with no memory, but hey I can be sure that I would remember if a company had taken me to court even if it was 13 years ago... Funnily enough I have not heard anything from good old GPB since ODC drafted me the letter above...I also sent a letter of complaint, but they did not respond. I will wait until Next furnish me witht he rest of the SAR Data, then GOD HELP GPB..... RIP GPB

Well I never thought that I would have to add to this thread. For those who want a quick review of this thread rather than having to read it all, the story goes: Been paying Geoffrey Parker Bourne for 13 years (whom are Intrum Justitia's in house solicitors) Back in Feb decided to send a CCA as I had no idea what I was paying this debt for, all I had was a payment book...for the last 13 years.. GPB wrote back & informed me that this debt had gone to court in 1993 I asked GPB to show me documentary evidence, have a read back over some of the correspondence, GPB insists there is a CCJ. I stopped paying GPB in Feb, I sent a SAR to Next Directory the original creditor... Guess what after GPB putting in writing many times that Next had taken me to court, I have today received this letter: Dear xxx I write in response to your letter of 20th August, and I am sorry that you have not received a reply to your earlier letter of 2 July. Further to your subject access request under the data Protection Act, I am pleased to enclose prints of all information that is immediately available from our computer systems, in respect of your account with the Next Directory. If we hold any earlier records than this, they will have been archived, and I have therefore requested our business systems team to conduct a full search of our database. Unfortunately this will take a little while longer, but I will of course forward any additional information, as soon as possible. I can advise that your debt to the Next directory was not sold to another company, and no deed of assignment was completed. Next directory did use the services of a third party debt collection agency, Interim Justitia, although no legal proceedings were instigated, and I expect you are aware that, due to the age of the debt, there is no longer any record of the default on your credit reference file. Next Directory did not apply any default charges, fees, or penal interest rates to your account in relation to the default, service charge (interest) would have been charged at the normal rate (currently 26.49APR equivalent), and this is shown on the copy statements enclosed. I can also advise you Next directory only record telephone calls for training purposes and these are erased within a couple of weeks. I hope the enclosed information is of use to you, and I will be in contact again as soon as I receive a response from our Business Systems Department. Yours sincerely So what can I do about GPB stating there was a CCJ issued? I now know the truth...

I too reported HBOS to the ICO in April for fraud that HBOS let happen due to their neglegence & not protecting my Identity and following security procedures. I got a letter yesterday, followed with a phone call, stating that they have written to HBOS demanding that they answer questions on their security procedures, and they have asked them why they have not responded to my SAR which I sent Special Delivery in February. The case officer told me that they have taken this very seriously and they will fully investigate, they agreed that they have tried to cover up certain issues...but in their haste sent me a document in which disclosed 3rd party information and it also disclosed concrete evidence that they have been untruthful... The ICO have given them 21 days to respond... I too had lost faith, until I received the letter.

I have a British Gas HomeCare plan, I was always under the impression that British Gas would service my boiler and central heating one a year, however British Gas disagree....Please can soemone clarify the position for me.... I write to BG asking for a refund for breach of contract, here is the letter and their reply: Dear Sirs Home Care Plan: XXXXX I am writing in connection to the above referenced Home Care Plan, which was taken out with yourselves in January, 2004. In fact, I am left wondering what kind of Agreement I have paid you for as to date you have failed to comply with the basic Terms & Conditions regarding my annual service. I would like to draw your attention to the following: What the Agreement (should) provide: "Labour and parts for repairs, depending on the level of service you have chosen." "One Safety and Maintenance Inspection in every year of your Agreement for Central heating, Boiler and controls, Gas Appliance Care and Gas Appliance Check." As you have failed to adhere to even one Safety & Maintenance Inspection during the period of time stipulated in the Agreement, I am now requesting a full refund of £140.50, together with the sum of £150; representing compensation for breach of contract and, failure to comply with the Agreement for 3 consecutive years, as detailed below. January 2004 – commencement of Care Plan Agreement March 1st 2004 – Service & Safety Inspection May 31st 2005 – overdue by 3 months: £65.25 July 4th 2006 – overdue by 1 month: £21.75 September 12th 2007 – overdue by 2 ½ months: £53.50 (this was the first available appointment) Without ambiguity, I trust I make myself perfectly clear, and invite your considered response within the next 14 days before taking this matter further. This is their reply: Dear XXXX Thank you blab la bla I am sorry to learn of the problems that you have experienced relating to your HomeCare agreement, in particular, the timing of your yearly Safety and Maintenance Inspections. As outlined in the terms and conditions “we will try and carry out the Safety and Maintenance Inspection around the same time each year where possible. This will depend on our workload and your preference for an appointment. After further investigating, I can confirm that your initial inspection in 2004 was completed on March 1st 2004. The inspection in 2005 was on May 31st, in 2006 it was on July 4th and this year is scheduled for September 12th. I apologise that the visits are more than 12 months apart and your inspection date is getting gradually later every year, this can be re-set next year should you wish me to do so. Your agreement originally commenced on 26th January 2004. This means that your contractual period proceeds from 26th January to 25th January every year. British gas will carry out the inspection within this period in accordance with your HomeCare agreement. “We will carry out a Safety and Maintenance Inspection once in every year of your agreement” To date, we have not breached this agreement with you. In light of the above, I do not think it is justified to refund any payment or compensate you, as you have requested in your letter, for breach of contract, I am sorry that this is not the response you were hoping for, however, it is not always possible to resolve compensation claims to everyone’s satisfaction. If you would like me to adjust your appointment date back to January next year then I will be happy to do so, although we do recommend that the optimum time for the inspection, is late summer or early autumn before your heating is switched on for the colder months. I would be happy if you could confirm what you would like me to do regarding this matter by contacting me directly on blab bla bla so that I can arrange any amendment for you. If you decide that you are happy to leave your visit around September each year, then you can expect that we will contact you, either by telephone or letter, up to three weeks before it is due, to agree a convenient time. I hope you feel that I have addressed the issues that you have brought to my attention. We are committed to giving our customers the best possible service and so I was sorry to hear of the difficulties that you have experienced. If you would like further information regarding this matter or if I can be of any assistance in the future, then please do not hesitate to contact me on blab la bla Yours sincerely Lee Theaker Customer Manager Customer Relations

This saga has been going on since February would you believe it, have been paying this debt for 14 years, originally sent a CCA request to be told there was a CCJ issued in 1993, however on asking GPB to provide evidence of this so called CCJ they fail to come up with anything... Thats when I rang Next the original creditor whom told me that they have never taken me to court and they have never received any of the payments, hence the reason I have sent a S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) to Next as GPB keep informing me that Next took me to court back in 1993 for the debt. I initially wrote to next to ask them to confirm what they had said on the phone, of course they ignored my letter. I then sent the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) and they have cashed the cheque (cheeky) but have not sent anything. So I want to take them to court for non compliance of SAR but wanted to know if it is a worth while cause or will it get struck out.... Can I claim for damages, I would only claim a nominal amount, but I would feel so satisfied if Next had to send me a cheque... I need proof that next did not issue the CCJ, then I will take GPB to the cleaners....watch this space...I am not scared GPB have had 14 years of my money....... Just to let you all know I have been to the court, and got the court registers, but as this supposidly CCJ was 14 years ago neither have retained records that far back...

I am not going to bother with the Information commissioner , they take too long, I have a Bank fraud case with them and I am still waiting for a case officer to be allocated, I have been waiting since February... I want to pursue this this non compliance through the courts, I need next to comply to prove to GPB there was never a CCJ in the first place. I have not paid GPB since February in any case & I do not intend to pay them anymore...Just if I can prove there was never a CCJ then GPB will be in big trouble...

Phil, The CCJ would not appear on my credit file in any case as this was 14 years ago. I want Next to comply with my SAR then I can prove that GPB are actually lying as they say next took me to court, and as said I have spoken to next and they claim they have never taken me to court. I have to get the DATA from Next to prove this, although they have chosen not to respond to letters ans now the SAR thats why I am asking about non compliance of SAR and going to court.

Brief outline of the case: Intrum Justitia brought bought the debt of off next 14 years ago. Geoffrey Parkey Bourne are the in house Solicitors whom I have been paying every month for 14 years, however to my amazement GPB claim that Next took me to court...GPB cannot prove this in any shape or form, I have SAR GPB & IJ over the months to try and establish if there was in fact a CCJ as I cannot recall this. I phoned Next a few months ago to be told that they have never taken me to court and that they have never received any of my payments. (this gave me the impression that next sold the debt) GPB insist that Next took me to court, so after many months I decided to send a SAR to Next which they have chosen to Ignore, however I sent a LBA which is due to expire on Monday. A few questions: I want to take next to court for non compliance of SAR is this a worth while cause? can I claim for damages say £100 plus costs? Will a court order Next to comply or will it get thrown out? I do not want to go to the ICO as it takes months and months to get to get allocated a case office. Next cashed the cheque after a couple of days of receiving the SAR.

Hi Beanie1, I do not have household legal cover anymore, I found it a total waste of time, I tried to use the legal side a couple of times only to be told "sorry" you are not covered for this issue.. So I felt that I was paying for nothing... In my opinion most seem to try and wriggle out of taking a claim on, I agree with your comment of "they will only take on a claim if there is a reasonable chance of winning" you can never tell how strong a case is, what you think is a strong case may lose and visa versa. I guess I will have to get myself a decent barrister, they are cheaper than solicitors as you can now contact them direct (Public Access) thanks anyway

OK, I will give them a call now, i was just under the impression that as it was a car insurance legal cover, any other issues would not be covered on the legal cover. I know Insurance companies will do and say anything not to have to pay up... will let you know

Surprise the policy quotes this: We will cover the following costs up to the indemnity limit: Costs for recovering uninsured losses which arise directly from any event, involving: your death or injury damage to your car damage to any property cause in the event which you own or are legally responsible for: and any other uninsured losses arising directly from any event

I have a serious problem at work, whereby I am being treated unfairly, regarding a reconstruction. I am at the stage now where I need to get professional legal advice, however I have been told to look to see if I have legal protection on my house, car or mortgage policies. I have legal protection on my car policy, but here goes the question (please don't shout I am stressed out enough) Would legal protection on a car insurance policy not just cover problems to do with vehicles?

I have a serious problem at work, whereby I am being treated unfairly, regarding a reconstruction. I am at the stage now where I need to get professional legal advice, however I have been told to look to see if I have legal protection on my house, car or mortgage policies. I have legal protection on my car policy, but here goes the question (please don't shout I am stressed out enough) Would legal protection on a car insurance policy not just cover problems to do with vehicles?

Can anyone give me any guidelines as to where I would stand if the they have not followed: a) Their own selection process b) There are going to be approx. 40-60 redundancies throughout the company, yet I have had nothing in writing. c) 25 min notice, before we had to listen to a conference call regarding the reconstruction. d) Straight after the conference call we were told our 1 2 1 meeting were the next day. Does anyone know if the correct procedures have been followed (apart from the fact they have not followed the selection process)

Company having a reconstruction of office staff, Out of the blue one morning was told that I had to listen to a recorded conference call in 25mins, to inform us that we would have to re-appy for our jobs, last resort redundancies, we have approx. 9,000 employees. Immediately after the conference call, I was told my 1 2 1 consultation would be the next day & given an Q & A document. During 1 2 1 was given a pack which included how the selection process would take place, which stated that if you had got over 55% in your recent appraisal you would go into the paper selection, if you got less than 55% it would be questioned if you were capable of doing a job in another department, if not you would be made redundant. There was a list of vacancies, a proposed decision tree, a job description, & that was basically all we were given. I am the office manager and work 24 hours I have two assistants one who works 16 hours and the other (who has only been with the company for 6 weeks) work full time 40 hours. When we were told the decision, i was told that i had to cut my hours from 24 to 20 my other assistant had to increase her hours from 16 to 24 and the other assistant was staying on 40 hours. Is this a fair selection? Also the full time assistant only got 17% in her appraisal and the selection process was if you got less than 55%, it would be decided if you could work in another department if not you were made redundant. Is this a fair selection? I have not had anything in writing laying out any redundancy payment that I may be entitled to should I be made redundant. There are a lot of other issues that the company have not followed properly, but I really do not want to get into too many details as it would be a very long thread.

I have already been in contact with the ICO, my case has been passed to the department, that deals with the more serious issues, I am just waiting for them to contact me. Yes I am huffed of to say the least regarding the SAR, I will issue a LBA this weekend to the Haliprats.

I hope someone will be able to give me the answer to this: Sent SAR to Haliprats (fraud issue) in February, after constant letters and reminding them of their obligation to comply, only after 5 1/2 months did they decide to respond. However they have only sent what they want me to see, no surprise there really, considering they know they are in the S**T. The question I need to ask, am I now obliged or do I have to send them a non compliance letter given them yet another chance to fully comply with my request. I just feel that they have had more than long enough, and I just want to go to court to make them fully comply. If the answer is "yes" I can go straight to court, would I state on my N1 form "non compliance to SAR" or would it be "partial non compliance to SAR as they have supplied some information" Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Hindsight is a great thing, when my boss told me that they thought that we needed a full time person to help, I did say at the time that we did not need a full time person, (a part timer would have been adequate) as there would not be enough work, however he has since admitted to me that I was right, and we did not actually need a full time person. He has said to me that the full timer had asked about the selection process , i.e how they will decide who to keep who to let go, the selection process is going to be done on appraisals which we all had a few weeks ago, she informed my boss that this would not be a fair process for her as she could not compete with anyone in our area as she has only been with the company for 5 weeks and her score was low due to this. I have to agree with her comment, as this would not be a fair selection process for her. so not sure how they are going to use a fair selection process due to this.

This process is throughout the company, not just at our branch, all other branches have 1 office person, the reason we have 3 is we are the biggest branch in the UK. Basically I am the office manager, and I have 2 assistants one of whom has only been with the company for 5 weeks, obviously the one that has only been with the company for 5 weeks has not learnt the the whole job in any case, the other assistant basically help with everything, but does not chase the debts. The work load will remain the same, if not get more as the company has just bought the unit next door, and i am told there are plans for bigger & better things at our branch. Basically nothing has changed the new job description is exactly the same as the old one, the only thing that has changed is the job title and the fact they think we only need an allocation of 60 hours to do the work load and a head count of 2 (however my boss did say that he did not have a problem with the actual head count, but he would have to put it through his boss)

Right, we will get the decision if we are to keep our jobs next thurs or friday, as said at present 3 of us do a total of 80 hours and we have been told that we have to re-apply for our positions as the office positions are being reconstructed. However these are my concerns 1) at our one to one Interview we were told that the current JOB TITLE is redundant (not the job role just the title) we were then given a job description which is exactly the same role as I am doing now. so just because they have changed the job title this is classed as "reconstruction" 2) why take on a full timer just 5 weeks ago knowing full well that you are going to cut the branch's allocation from 80hrs to 60hrs, you are not telling me the company did not know that this was in the pipe line? 3) why were told that a member of HR, my boss and someone from security would be at the one to one Interviews, yet when we got there there was only my boss conducting the Interviews. 4) we were not offered the choice of having a witness

Cal, there are 3 of us in our office, I am the office manager, and I have 2 assistants, one of whom has been there 5 weeks and is full time, the other has been there just coming up on a year she works part time, I have been with the company a total of 5 years but had a break in contract (took redundancy) and have only been back 2 years in October, I work part time We do not have a Union at work, and I do not belong to one:( On Tuesday we were told that we had to listen to a conference call, after the call we were told our one 2 one meetings were on Wednesday at 10, 10.30 and 11, we received nothing in writing and were not offered a witness. We were told that we will be told the outcome next Thurs or Frid. This is happening throughout the company but only to office staff. We have been told the allocation of hours for our size branch will be 60 hours with a head count of 2...now I work 24 hours over 3 days, my 1st assistant works 16 hours over 2 days and my other assistant works full time 40 hours and has only been with the company for 5 weeks. So realistically between us we are doing 80 hours and we have been told that the branch has an allocation of 60 hours with a head count of 2, now my concern is that they knew this was going to happen more than 5 weeks ago why take on a full timer?

anyone!!!!