In September 2013 BT negligently deleted 9 years of my emails, the emails contained information and evidence on a project that I had been working on, there were also attachments to emails and details of contacts that were also lost/deleted. I duly complained to BT and followed the requirements set out in their complaints procedure, unfortunately BT did not. Subsequent to which I reported the loss of emails to the Information Commissioner in the hope they would take an interest, the breach of the Data Protection Act as defined on their website seemed to have been satisfied. I was at all times told by BT that my telephone conversation was recorded which gave me some comfort, short lived when I found out this was untrue. At the end of the 'in house' procedure I was offered £100 as a 'good will' gesture, this I declined and reported my complaint to the Ombudsman Service-Communications(OSC) which meant my complaint was now Negligence and Maladministration against BT, I had spoken to the OSC at some considerable length to ensure that the nature of my complaint was within their remit and established that it was. The OSC, outside their suggested time scale, issued their 'adjudication' which was/is flawed in many respects in that they claim that my contract for telephone and Broadband services with BT did not include email, which it does/did. The report also blamed the 'negligent acts of BT on a 'system failure' which would/could not have been possible. The maladministration of the OSC that I have been obliged to deal with was/is worse than that suffered during my dealings with BT. I obtained a copy of the BT 'call log' that contains 135 entries and refers to failed 'call backs', in fact there were 27 failed call backs which resulted in 54 telephone calls from me to BT, each call took 40 minutes to get through to a person and even than not the right person. Subsequent events required that I must now issue a further complaint this time to the Independent Assessor who reviews action of the OSC, he found in my favour on a number of issues concerning Maladministration although he cannot review the findings of the OSC or their methodology. The conclusion now is that the service available for complaining about negligence of your Internet Service Provider(ISP) is not fit for purpose, a further complaint now lodged with my MP for progress through the Parliamentary & Health Service Ombudsman whilst still attempting to obtain a meaningful reply from the OSC regarding the false and misleading assertions contained in their adjudication, so far only the 'system failure' has been dropped and false reference to evidence that did not exist also seems to be admitted. Clearly I now need some help and any suggestions would be welcome. As to the value of my claim, this has yet to be discussed or assessed but the 9 years work was done whilst I became disabled and now suffer with COPD (respiratory dis-function) and the work can never be replicated or replaced.

Debt-hit soldiers are targeted by 3,300% payday loan firm... in MOD's own magazine Loans company sold advertising space in Ministry of Defence magazine Rising concern about the number of soldiers getting into debt New recruits earn less than £14,000 a year and private are paid £18,000 The Ministry of Defence was condemned last night for cashing in on the debts of its poorest soldiers by selling advertising space in its staff magazine to a payday loans company. For an undisclosed fee, Forces Loans, which charges an APR of more than 3,300 per cent, is promoting its loans in Defence Focus – a magazine published by the MoD and read by British troops worldwide. The revelation comes as Army commanding officers are expressing concern about the numbers of soldiers getting into debt, and when thousands of troops are expecting to be made redundant in the latest round of job cuts. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2254767/Debt-hit-soldiers-targeted-3-300-payday-loan-firm-MODs-magazine.html