Capital One card debt (CCA)

[lexis200]

Thanks for that CitizenB, I'll scurry off to amend that asap.

 

I normally do bullet points raised, but they ignore them. I was going on a different tack this time:D I think I'll do both, then it just serves the purpose of making them seem more like morons than normal if they don't answer them.

 

The date thing just got my attention as it was sent so that it would arrive on the last day before they were out of time. With any other institutions I would say this was a coincidence, but for some reason I'm strangely suspicious of the banks. Can't think why;)

 

Did you bother going to the ICO when they didn't comply? I've not had to do it before as the threat seemed to kick them into touch.

[citizenB]

Thanks for that CitizenB, I'll scurry off to amend that asap.

 

I normally do bullet points raised, but they ignore them. I was going on a different tack this time:D I think I'll do both, then it just serves the purpose of making them seem more like morons than normal if they don't answer them.

 

The date thing just got my attention as it was sent so that it would arrive on the last day before they were out of time. With any other institutions I would say this was a coincidence, but for some reason I'm strangely suspicious of the banks. Can't think why;)

 

Did you bother going to the Information Commissioners Office when they didn't comply? I've not had to do it before as the threat seemed to kick them into touch.

 

I think it would still look rather bad should things get taken further and you bring it to the attention of say the FOS or ICO.

 

Yes, I have my complaint in with the ICO at the moment, I think I lost patience with Cap 1 around October and put the complaint in mid November, so they havent had it for too long.

[lexis200]

Letter amended as per your thoughts CB, and going off today.

 

Wish me luck:D

[Desperate Daniella]

Subscribing.

 

Wish you luck.

 

DD

[lexis200]

Thank you:)

[citizenB]

fingers crossed

[traceyb918]

Good luck with these scumbags!!!!!!!

[SB100]

All quiet?

[lexis200]

Hi SB

 

'Fraid so:( If nothing comes in the post today I'll get a complaint into the ICO.

 

Cap1 can't pretend they've complied as I was explicit in what I wanted; there was no way it could have been mis-interpreted by them, especially with a reminder to them.

 

Ho hum:rolleyes:

[SB100]

Same here...

[citizenB]

 

Cap1 can't pretend they've complied as I was explicit in what I wanted; there was no way it could have been mis-interpreted by them, especially with a reminder to them.

 

Ho hum:rolleyes:

 

Capital One specialise in mis interpretation:rolleyes:

[SB100]

Ha! They finally defaulted me... not sure why I'm happy tbh, but at least it breaks the tedious silence! Will post the relevant stuff on my thread tomorrow

[lexis200]

Well congratulations SB100, you seem very happy about it:D Have you posted on your thread as it's not flagged up on my list yet?

 

Well, I spent a couple of hours today writing a letter to the lovely chaps at Cap1 to send tomorrow - a formal complaint specifically berating Ellie Renshaw who was in charge of sending the SAR. She never even bothered acknowledging the compliance issues etc that I raised in the letter of the 20th. I also looked into complaining to the ICO, and started getting evidence together.

 

Then, much to my amazement, I had a phone call this evening from a chap there. A very nice man, who phoned up specifically to address two of the issues in the letter. First, the benefits bit. He apologised profusely for this happening, and said it was clearly a mistake on their part, and should never have happened. Apparently (and I am fully aware they will be covering their arses here as they really cocked up with it) they 'mistakenly' took the benefit payment as a normal income, hence the higher amount required from them. How they managed this when it was clearly marked 'benefit payment' on the form is a mystery.

 

Anyway, not only did he apologise (more than once) but he also offered to send a cheque to me for the difference in what I did pay and what I should have paid!!! Of course there was a caveat to this, which was that it would just be added back onto the balance, so I declined. To be honest, if I get a good result with the CCA it won't matter. If I don't I'll go for charges - there's not many but there are a few. Either way I'm not worried about it.

 

He also explained the event/history purge bits, and from this it came to light that they had not sent all the documentation they could. This is apparently being compiled now and will be with me by Friday. I'm not holding my breath, but I did 'mention' that I had been sorting out a complaint to the ICO, and I would just put it on hold until I had received the latest lot of stuff. I also made it clear that should certain things not arrive, such as, oh I don't know, a signed agreement, then the complaint would be on its way. This is recorded by both them and me, so I should be covered either way:D

 

So there you have it - they are not all gits to talk to. He was perfectly pleasant and as helpful as he could be. Granted a lot of that will be because they'd have been in huge trouble if I'd reported them for using my benefit payment in order to up the amount they could ask for, but still, it makes a refreshing change!

[lexis200]

Okie dokie

 

New letter to go out to the lovely Ellie - any comments anyone?

 

Dear Ms Renshaw

 

You have recently sent me further documents relation to my Subject Access Request, originally sent by me on the 8th December 2008.

 

I would first like to address the Credit Agreement you have sent me. I have several major concerns about it’s authenticity, and as such I would like you to confirm in writing that the double sided document you have sent is indeed a copy of both original sides of the original Agreement.

 

If you still state this is the original agreement, please be aware I will require sight of it so that I can be assured it is authentic. I will be happy to travel to your offices in order to do this so that you are not inconvenienced. If you refuse this request I will be requiring a full explanation of your reasoning behind declining this reasonable request.

 

Once you have either confirmed whether or not it is a copy of both sides of the original, I will write again with details of my concerns in order for you to address them and give me your explanations, and if applicable to arrange a date that I can view the document.

 

I would now like to address your response to my questions regarding the request I made to see my agreement under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. In your reply of the 25th November, you state ‘In accordance with Section 78, we sent you a true copy of your credit agreement as varied’ This is most definitely not what is required of you. In order to comply with the Act you must send a ‘true copy’; there is no mention of ‘as varied’. The only way you can comply with this by sending a ‘true copy’ rather than the actual agreement is by sending a copy that is the same in both form and content as the original. This must be accompanied by historic terms and conditions from the time the account was opened (as these would be referred to in the agreement), and a current set of terms and conditions. This is something that I as a lay person can fully understand from reading the CCA1974, so it is incomprehensible that a financial institution would attempt to circumvent these rules, and furthermore, to try and persuade me that you are correct in your assertions.

 

In addition, you state (after sending a blank current set of terms) that I ‘clearly have a valid and enforceable credit agreement with Capital One’. Please explain in full how a blank document from 2008 can be an enforceable agreement for an account opened in 2004? If this is indeed the case, you will no doubt be accepting the agreement I am currently formatting that shows you have in fact had an account with me, and have a large balance outstanding. Of course it is not from when you opened the account, and does not have anything relating to you within it, but nevertheless, according to your own words it is entirely enforceable.

 

I asked in my letter of 20th January what the phrases ‘event purge’ and ‘history purge’ meant. When Graham Daley phoned me to explain this, and why you had seen fit to class benefit payments as income, he explained this was simply due to notes not being held on your ‘ProphIT’ system for long, and that these notes would be included in the second SAR you sent.

 

I have had an extra 40 pages of ‘raw data’, however this simply seems to be data for your analysis rather than anything relevant to memos that have been noted down and then purged. In addition to this, the latest date I can find on the ‘Prospect WHouse Raw Data’ sheets is in 2007. As all the ‘event purge’ and ‘history purge’ notes seem to relate to 2008 onwards, I still require them to view. It has also left me wondering where the records of any notes/letters sent to me prior to 2007 are (the earliest date I can find on the ‘ProphIT’ pages), and why they have not been included in my request? As the account was opened in 2004, all documents and notes/memos (including internal memos not included on ProphIT) relating to me should still be available, and as such I require these to be forwarded to me.

 

I would also like clarification of a few phrases and abbreviations that are not clear. I have noted them below.

 

 

• ERC
  
• NFA
  
• COL
  
• BAT
  
• B94432 – DISCLOSURE GROUP CHANGED FROM STANDARD TO NEWSTAND
  
• 250805 12:00 A 013 GKUMAR CONV
  
• 00022: //BVT SOLD @12.94% FOR- 220.00
  

 

Please ensure all the information I have requested, and that should have already been provided following my original request in December, is forwarded as a matter of urgency, and certainly not more than 21 days from date of receipt of this Recorded Delivery letter.

 

I look forward to your prompt written response.

[SB100]

"I regret to inform you that we've already given our final response and you should address any further concerns to the FOS"....

 

Sorry, couldn't resist

[the_shadow]

"I regret to inform you that we've already given our final response and you should address any further concerns to the FOS"....

 

Sorry, couldn't resist

 

 

haha if I had one spare at the moment, £20 on the same

[lexis200]

Well aren't you two pessimists?

 

Personally I think she's going to have an epiphany after reading my letter and write the whole lot off:D

[SB100]

fingers crossed for you

[the_shadow]

Well aren't you two pessimists?

 

Personally I think she's going to have an epiphany after reading my letter and write the whole lot off:D

 

Sorry:(

 

I like to think me and Ellie are postpals, the amount of letters I've sent her:)

 

As always its a valuable paper trail and shows pro-active attempt to resolve matters unlike the banks usual responses.

 

Good luck, I'll be nicking the letter if it works:p

 

PmW

[SB100]

Just to add, I've still received nothing bearing a signature whatsoever:confused:

[lexis200]

Forgot to mention, one of the paras in the covering letter sent was (to my mind anyway) very carefully worded.

 

'I can confirm that we have sent you a copy of your current credit agreement and a copy of the document you signed when you applied for your Capital One credit card. This signature part of your credit agreement does not constitute the full terms and conditions, and these can be found on your current credit agreement'

 

So they describe the blank one as a credit agreement, but they don't call the agreement the agreement? Also the signature part of your agreement? Suggesting there's more to it?

 

Maybe I'm being overly paranoid.

 

What I am sure about though is that this is two different documents. I must get OH to scan it for me so that you lot can add your opinions, but there are several points that I think are very very suspect.

[lexis200]

Sorry:(

 

I like to think me and Ellie are postpals, the amount of letters I've sent her:)

 

As always its a valuable paper trail and shows pro-active attempt to resolve matters unlike the banks usual responses.

 

Good luck, I'll be nicking the letter if it works:p

 

PmW

 

No worries, I was joking - apart from the write of of course, coz that's a dead cert:rolleyes:

[the_shadow]

 

Maybe I'm being overly paranoid.

 

 

I doubt it, more twists than the big dipper with this lot

 

What I am sure about though is that this is two different documents. I must get OH to scan it for me so that you lot can add your opinions, but there are several points that I think are very very suspect.

 

Hmm section 23 in t&c by any chance?

[citizenB]

You might also point out that to have " varied something" you need "something to vary"

 

IOW, how do you know it has been or what has been varied, if you havent got it to compare with IYKWIM

[lexis200]

I doubt it, more twists than the big dipper with this lot

 

 

 

Hmm section 23 in t&c by any chance?

 

That'd certainly be one of them:)