Aviva posted me some very insulting to me marketing material in february so I contacted them to complain. They claimed that I had opted to receive marketing some years before, when i lived at a previous address. After further correspondence where they failed to produce any evidence of htis supposed agreemnt or ticked box (never used web or paper forms to agree to anything) they admitted they did not ahve such an agreement, had mixed my personal data up with another person of a similar name as well and offered me £75 when I had requested £250 as that was a sum courts had agreed was a minimum under persuasive case precedent. The main problem is the peopel who deal with a complaint are limited in what they can offer and do not know much about the DPA or even what other departments have been up to. in my case it was Aviva Insurance UK Ltd that had passed on erroneous personal data to Aviva Equity release Ltd, a separate company, without any authorisation and they finally accepted that this was a breach of the DPA, apologised and have agreed to pay me the £250 demanded to avoid legal action. Next year the law changes on what is deemed consent when ticking (or not) boxes and who they can pass your details to without express consent so hopefully this will become a rarer instance but in the meanwhile if you have a complaint, be persistent, stick to your guns if you are right and dont accept a stock response that they dont have to think about. My complaint got to director level because they didnt initially think they could be wrong, ignored the Vidal Hall v Google decision and blamed me for their errors. You dont have to put up with rubbish from big companies.

Hi Just received the attached today 12th July. I was back in the car 4 minutes before the parking expired I was unaware that there were cameras up and was loitering near the exit waiting for the family to catch up. I thought as I was in the car out of the space that there wouldn't be a problem as I wasn't aware as I say there were cameras on the entrance/exit. I presume i'll have to pay this now, i'll need to pay in installments as my only source of income is my ESA so can't afford even the £60 discounted figure. There is signage up in the car park but I didn't see mention of anything to do with ANPR cameras anywhere, as it was a pub car park with a ticket machine I assumed it'd just be the pub enforcing it. Any suggestions gratefully received, thanks

Hey, just wanting to know where I stand. Let me start with saying i'm no newbie to computers and this wasn't a case of me giving away my login details via some [problem]/phishing email. I have more than 20 years computer/internet experience under my belt and even have no use for anti-virus software (put it this way, I know to avoid anything which might gain me a virus and know the system registry and background tasks like the back of my hand). My ebay account has been up and running for just over 15 years without a problem. eBay has always been fine for me. To cut it short, the past few days the money in my bank didn't quite add up. Something was pending for £30. I guessed it might just be their systems catching up. I had a look at my eBay account and shocking to me was a purchase done a few days ago for a computer game priced at £30. I knew it wasn't me or anyone else I knew who made that purchase. Some cheeky sod has well and truly defrauded me out of money. They bought the game (which includes a download code and a disc). They read the eBay inbox message with the download code, redeemed it and got the disc (which is useless as the code has been redeemed) dispatched to my old address that was still saved on my account. They even tried to hide the fact by paying for it, not out of my linked PayPal account direct (which shows on my PayPal account transactions), but via my debit card saved on my eBay account (that processes through PayPal but doesn't show up in my PayPal transactions history). The only way I can imagine this happened was because of ebay's 2014 data breach and now how frequently they require someone to change their password. About a week ago I logged into my eBay account (via a typed address) and was forced to change my password. My current password was secure (7 digits long, 2 capital and 1 non capital letter), but as I would struggle to remember another similar password, I used a basic password I used to use 10 years ago. It's possible that login/password combo was saved by a bot all those years ago and was detected as being my new password and the account was accessed. Where do I stand now? It shows on my bank account as card payment to paypal. The bank have cancelled my card and i'm guessing they could do a chargeback that will likely cause me fees with PayPal and a suspended account. Will PayPal/eBay refund this? Considering the voucher would have been redeemed by now. Thanks

Brief background summary. I had a loan with bank, defaulted and they got judgement and charging order. Took bank to court for PPI on the loan, got default judgement and warrant of execution. Bank applied to get judgement and warrant set aside. We reached a compromise that they would reduce balance of judgement and charging order and amend the same accordingly. They have since sold debt without reducing the balance or amending judgement or charging order. Whats the best way to handle this? can I claim damages? Thanks in advance.

Hi, Hopefully someone can offer me some advice here, sorry for the long post. I live in Bristol and have a statutory periodic tenancy on a rolling one month basis. I have been here just over a year. My landlady has repeatedly breached the tenancy agreement by coming round and allowing herself and workmen access to my house with no notice whatsoever. My tenancy agreement says she must give 24 hours notice for any visit. I have told the letting agents in writing on several occasions that I am categorically not OK with this and I insist on notice. They have informed me (in writing) that they have asked the landlady to provide me with notice of her visits, but this has happened numerous times since. I live alone and I feel like I've been robbed of my privacy and harassed in my own home. As a result, I have found somewhere else to live, but I cannot move in for a month or so yet, maybe longer. My question is, because she has breached the tenancy agreement, can I serve my one month's notice from any date, citing these breaches, rather than the date of the rental payment (the 21st). When I can move, I want to get out of this house as soon as possible, and I don't need a reference from her for my new flat. I know "fair" doesn't hold always much weight legally, but it doesn't seem right that she can breach the agreement at will and suffer no consequences, but if I breached the terms, I would be served notice and evicted. I would be happy to stay here had I not been subject to this treatment, but now I feel I have no choice if I want a quiet life.

Well finally OFCOM have finally find a result with the Vodafone Investigation they were dealing with. The investigation relates to a fairly wide period between 1st January 2014 and 5th November 2015

I'll try to keep this simple and to the point. A stat demand was served and a hearing set to have the application to set aside heard. I withdrew the application to set aside on the grounds that a settlement was reached. Fast forward and payments on the settlement agreement have stopped on my end as the deliverable from the petitioners can physically be no longer provided. Namely they are no longer authorised to sell stock as specified in the settlement agreement and the forms for transfer have been returned by the company. I don't see in which world it would be just for me to pay for something that I'm not going to receive. They have issued a bankruptcy petition for the breach of the settlement agreement and I have until Tuesday to file a 6.19. Does this form need to be accompanied by a witness statement and hand delivered to the court or can I fax/email? Is the 6.19 even the right thing to do here? Thanks in advance.

abc

Hi there I will try to keep this as brief as possible. I was off sick from work and visited the company Doctor. I was then emailed the report as was my employing manager. It stated the letter was private and confidential and at the bottom of the email it stated it was restricted. This email has now been used in a potential disciplinary investigation against myself. I received the disciplinary papers with this email included, yet some of it had been redacted although not very well as you could still see certain parts of the email, however the nature of my illness had not been redacted at all. I have also been told that the other person involved in the disciplinary has been given the exact same pack that I have which means that they have not only access to my medical papers but also my home address. I work for a well known large company. I believe there is potential for two issues here. Any advice is gratefully received.

ASA Adjudication on Caversham Finance Ltd Caversham Finance Ltd t/a BrightHouse 5 Hercules Way Leavesden Park Watford Hertfordshire WD25 7GS Date: 12 February 2014 Media: Television Sector: Financial Number of complaints: 1 Agency: The Gate Films Complaint Ref: A13-230773 Ad A TV ad for a repayment retailer. The ad began with on-screen text that stated "Caversham Finance ... 29.9% APR representative". After the on-screen text disappeared, the voice-over said, "At BrightHouse we're making life a little bit easier by giving you the things you need right now and letting you pay for them a little bit at a time either weekly or monthly. We offer quick and simple credit and a price match promise on everything." During the ad, gold coloured blocks appeared which morphed into household products. Issue The complainant challenged whether the ad was misleading because the APR was not sufficiently clear. BCAP Code 1.314.113.13.23.9 Response Caversham Finance Ltd t/a BrightHouse said the ad did not contain an amount of money and did not display any financial information. They said because the ad did not contain an incentive or comparison information, it was not necessary to display an APR. Clearcast said they had reconsidered the ad and accepted that the on-screen text with the APR would have been more relevant if it had appeared later in the ad when the voice-over mentioned payment options. They said due to time restrictions and the amount of on-screen text it would have been difficult to include all features. They said they had received confirmation from the advertiser before the ad was submitted that it complied with the Consumer Credit Act. Assessment Upheld The ASA noted The Consumer Credit (Advertisements) Regulations 2010 (CCARs) stated that, where a credit advertisement included various trigger information, such as an indication that credit was available to persons who might otherwise consider their access to credit restricted, a favourable comparison of their terms of credit to other competitors or any incentive to apply for credit, the ad must specify the representative APR. The CCARs also stated the representative APR must be given greater prominence than the trigger. We consulted the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) who said whilst the APR was clearly shown at the beginning of the ad, they believed the voice-over reference to "quick and simple credit" was likely to be an incentive to apply for credit, and that "either weekly or monthly [repayments]" constituted a comparative indication, and that both were therefore triggers which were given greater prominence than the APR. We agreed that the reference to "quick and simple credit" constituted an incentive to apply for credit and that the reference to the flexible repayment options was a comparative indication, because it implied a benefit available from BrightHouse that would not be available from other credit providers. We considered that information given in a voice-over was likely to be viewed by consumers as more prominent than on-screen text at the bottom of the screen, and that on-screen text at the bottom of the screen was therefore unlikely to be sufficient if the trigger information was given in the voice-over. Although the representative APR appeared on screen at the beginning of the ad we did not consider that it was given greater prominence in the overall presentation of the ad than the trigger information ("quick and simple credit" and "letting you pay for them a little bit at a time either weekly or monthly"). We therefore concluded that the ad breached the Code. The ad breached BCAP Code rules 1.3 (Compliance) and 14.11 (Financial products, services and investments). Action The ad must not be broadcast again in its current form. We told BrightHouse to ensure the APR was given greater prominence than any trigger information in future. We advised them that if the trigger information was given by the voice-over in a TV ad, in general, it was unlikely to be sufficient for the representative APR to be included only in on-screen text.

Hi all, we have a bit of a problem, we have sent a letter to Wonga three weeks ago trying to pay off our £700 loan over three months due to financial difficulties. After three weeks i get a phone call from my son telling me that they have actually sent a response to our letter to his email. Our account with Wonga has nothing to do with our son at all. My husband and my son have the same first name, but my son also has two middle names which he made known to Wonga when he first took out a loan with them. So just because of the same first name, they automatically assumed that it was my son who sent them the letter. We have been in contact with Wonga, making clear to them that they have breached the Data Protection Act, which they admitted to. They made us the offer of writing off all interest and £100 off the original debt. We are not satisfied with that and want more. I need to write a letter to them to let them know that the account is now in dispute due to them breaching the DPA. Can anybody give me any advise on how to formulate this letter to them? Thanks in Advace Dani