Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well done. Are you able to tell us more about how it went on the day please? HB
    • when mediation call they will ask the same 3 questions that are in their email you had to accept it going forward. simply state 'i do not have enough information from the claimant to make an informed decision upon mediation so i refuse. end of problem.  
    • Food prices, including a $40 chicken, has stoked fury and calls for big foreign supermarket chains to come to Canada.View the full article
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business CEntre Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio i Ltd How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self   Date of issue –  15 Feb 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  The claim is for the sum of £922 due by the Defendant under and agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a Capital One account with an account reference of [number with 16 digits] The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit ACt 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 16-06-23, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of the issue of these proceedings in the sum of £49.15 The Claimant claims the sum of £972 What is the total value of the claim? £1112 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? I dont know the details of the PAPDC to know if it was pursuant to paragraph 3, but I did receive a Letter of Claim with a questionaire/form to fill. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? no Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned/purchaser Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I was aware, I'm not certain I received a 'Notice of Assignment' from Capital One but may have been informed the account had been sold without such a title on the letter? Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not since the debt purchase, and not from Capital One. Why did you cease payments? I can't remember - it was the tail end of the pandemic and I may not have had enough income to keep up payments - I am self-employed and work in the event industry - at that time. I also had a bank account that didn't allow direct debits and may have just forgotten payments and became annoyed at fines for late payments. What was the date of your last payment? Appears to be 20/4/2022 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No Here is my Defence: Defence - 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with Capital One but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request.. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of having been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) 5. The Defendant has sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request. 6. A further request has been made via CPR 31.14 to the Claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The Claimant has not complied and to date nothing has been received. 7. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim 8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed 9. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of section 136 of the Law of Property Act and section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .................. Please note that I had to write a defence quite quickly as I hit the deadline. At the time of writing the defence, I hadn't been able to find correspondence from Capital One, but had since found default letter etc. I submitted CCA request and CPR 31.14. However, I didn't get any proof of postage or use registered post for the CPR (an oversight) but did with the CCA request. I received a pack which included a letter from Overdales, going over the defence I'd filed, as well as letters of Lowells and reprints of letters from Capital One. But I have no idea if this pack is in response to the CCA request or the CPR ! I would have expected two separate responses ... although I do know they are both the same company. Looking over the pack today, and looking through old emails .. I find some discrepancies in the Capital One default letters (notice of default and Claim of default). They are both dated *before* an email I have stating that a default can be avoided. The one single page of agreement sent (so not the full agreement) has a 16 digit number at the top in small print, next to 'Capital One' which corresponds to a number called 'PURN' printed at the top of each of the 10 pages of ins and outs of the account (they're not official statements, but a list of monthly goings) yet no mention anywhere on either of the account number. I cant really scan them at the moment - I can later tomorrow, but that will be after the mediation call I'm sure. I guess I may be on my own for this mediation ... I am not certain the CCA request has been satisfied .. or if the CPR has been . And then I appear to have evidence that the Default notices provided are fabricated ? Yet, I do have (elsewhere ... not at home) Default letters from Capital One I can check ..
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

RBS deny DPA breach but ICO says otherwise - help pls


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5613 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hello all.

This CAG site is so massive i been in the wrong section for ages. My post isin the bank charges reclaiming bit but maybe i should have been in this DPA section :) :)

 

my problem has been going on for over 3 years now.

if any1's interested here is the link to my story but i warn you it is long.

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/royal-bank-scotland/155111-credit-damage-im-about.html

 

not sure if the link will work, or is allowed.

 

Anyway, I have had the Information Commissioner look at my complaint and we have had his response (Nov07) that RBS have breached the act and we can take them to court under section 13 blah blah, blah.

 

We have done that and its been very messy for us so far and continues to be. The RBS have responded to the courts, and to my claim, that not only have they not breached the Act but they have absolutely no knowledge of the ICO investigation/result!! :shock:

 

I have about two weeks to respond to the courts, and of course part of my response will include the ICO letter as evidence.

 

I have also written to the ICO to ask him why, or if they have informed RBS of the situation he informed me of last year.

 

Does anyone know why RBS would deny all knowledge of the ICO's involvement?

 

The other thing is, if any1 reads my other thread you'll know, the credit damage we have suffered has come as a direct result of their application of bank charges so does any1 know if my situation has changed now that the OFT case has finished, forgetting about the appeal as the last ruling stands unles the appeal changes things, i believe.

 

any info would be appreciated, thanks.

 

D&M

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Well, the CAG are a really, really wondeful bunch of people who's invaluable support means more to me and my family than anything.

 

My Case is about the fact that my wife and i are seriously damaged due to RBS bank charges. We have had our credit files completely screwed up by the errors of this bank and its application of charges and credit references.

 

There used to be a Page in the NEWS section of the CAG in which Marc Gander, the founder of CAG, talks about the fact that people are damaged on their credit files by the application of bank charges.

 

We have been seriously damaged in this way and had our lives screwed up. The bank has in the past admitted in writing that they were wrong to apply these charges. THE Information Commissioner has told us that the bank is in breach of the Data Protection Act.

 

We are trying our hardest to get them in court over this but so far we have been going 3 years.

 

Just this week recieved a case allocation questionaire though so things could be moving.

 

a big CHEERS to all CAG

Edited by D&M-GIANTKILLERS
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi D&M,

I've only just found your thread. I'm sorry I can't offer any advice; I don't have any expertise in this area.

 

I do have experience of RBS though (unfortunately): they are an utterly vile company. Wishing you the very best of luck in your endeavours.:)

 

I'm at a loss to explain why no-one has answered your threads - this is unusual. If you click on the red triangle, this will bring your post to the attention of the site team.

Edited by underdog13
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonderful Underdog, very kind of you.

 

That means a great deal to us.

 

You are right about your opinion of RBS. They are not very nice.

 

They hired 4 firms of solicitors at once against my wife and I, despite their knowledge of rules which say joint account holders are to be treated as one in any legal proceedings.

 

They did this purely to increase our legal costs in the hope that we would be unable continue our action against them.

 

That did not work for them as we continued. So then they ahem my solicitor!!

 

Although i know this sounds unbelievable, i have complaints in with the SRA about my solicitor and the Bar Standards Board about the barrister. The BSB have just told me that my complaint is going to the 2nd stage of their complaints process, which means that the BSB complaints Commissioner thinks that there is evidence of serious misconduct. The BSB complaints committee will be looking at the complaint at the end of January.

 

I have told the FSA but all they say is, "We will pass this information on to the team respopnsible for RBS"

 

When i told the FSA that the RBS rule breaking has increased my legal costs and put undue pressure on us, they said the Financial Services and MArketing Act prevents them from disclosing anything. They too are corrupt.

 

This is also utter crap and an example of how the FSAs relationship with the banks are questionable and wants to protect them, and only acts on things if millions of people complain at once, such as the bank charges reclaim case.

 

The FSMA only prevents the FSA from disclosing things about a firm because, if the firm is found to be innocent of the complaint/charges then just being involved can be damaging to the firm.

 

in our case though, the RBS has alredy been shown to have breached the Data Protection Act by the Information Commissioners Office and therefore the FSMA should not apply.

 

Anyway, i could keep going on and on all night but thats would not help me.

 

Thanks again for your kind words Underdog, they are much appreciated.

 

Cheers ;)

 

ps, i can't see ared triangle so i have hit a yellow one instead.

Edited by MARTIN3030
Edited slightly please be a bit more choosy with words !!
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi D & M,

 

I'm going to go read your other thread - I probably won't be able to help other than offer you some shoulder support, but sometimes knowing that other people are beside and behind you is all that you need.

 

the red triangle can be found at the bottom of each post in all threads in the grey box at the left hand side where it states the posters name at the top where you will also find a green dot, scales of justice and the triangle (from left to right).

 

I will hit the triangle for you, but it helps to know where to locate it incase you need it in the future.

 

Jody

Jody123

Please note I have no legal training - the information I have has been gleaned from too many hours on this site! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi D&M,

I think sometimes this happens, it's nothing personal. We're all trying to live our lives while still posting here.

The triangle is a little red triangle on the bottom left of a post. This alerts the moderators.

We will not be intimidated.

'The pen is mightier than the sword'.

Petition to Outlaw Debt Sale and Purchase

- can't read/post much as eye strain's v.bad.

VIVA CAG!!! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi D&M,

Can you tell me what the Information Commissioners Office actually said? which Principle of the Data Protection Act they had breached was it the Fourth Principle of the Data Protection Act?

Also when they changed your O/D to a loan did you sign anything? and a very impiortant point was your account transferred to CMS Telford?....VERY important that and could be most damming to RBS along with my case Paul Walton & D&D. more than you can imagine!!

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a nightmare for you D&M; my heartfelt sympathies. Oh how I wish someone would bring this appalling company to book!

 

I can quite believe that RBS would stoop to these practices.. There is an internal NatWest memo on here (on Paul Walton's thread 'Walton V RBS'), boasting about recreating non existant agreements.

 

I'll be following your case with interest, offering moral support and any help I can. Really rooting for you in your fight against RBS and your solicitor and barrister.:)

Edited by underdog13
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys,I have lots in common with these issues,since I am myself in Lit with RBS CMS.

However we have to be very careful about how we discuss here-that means no references using those words which could (or are) libel in the absence of them being properly substantiated and proven.

A little restraint then please.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

RBS confirmed to a Government Minister that my accounts had been set up incorrectly at CMS. (long story) However, when i step into court and request that this be rectified pursuant to sec 13 DPA 1998 RBSs lawyer presented the DJ with the following: "Mr Walton's accounts are accurate and up to date". I beleive this and the fact that RBS refused to submit my upto date accounting details was the reason my claim was struck out.....Sparkie has had simillar experiences in court.

 

Good luck.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys,I have lots in common with these issues,since I am myself in Lit with RBS CMS.

However we have to be very careful about how we discuss here-that means no references using those words which could (or are) libel in the absence of them being properly substantiated and proven.

A little restraint then please.

 

Martin 3030,

 

Could I ask being as you are in contact with CMS Telford have they given you any information that they may/do also hold a "Router Account" in respect of any account you have/had with RBS??

 

sparkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there Sparkie mate.

 

I have just sent you an email. Took me an hour to write it so sorry its a longish read.

 

Thanks everyone for all your words, thats what we really need. Sorry for my rant at the top of the thread.:-D

 

In my other thread Sparkie told me that Kings Chambers barristers in Manchester represent RBS and NatWest.

 

My solicitor had taken me there for a so called conference in which we thought the barrister was going to tell us how well our case would do in court, but instead he spent an hour and a half trying to frighten my wife and i with some ridiculous talk that this "powerful bank could beat anybody in court"

 

To cut a long story short, I suspected my solicitor was a traitor, and the barrsiter was a set up. It failed as i continue the case as a L.I.P. in court.

 

I reported the solicitor to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), and the barrister to the Bar Standards Board (BSB).

 

The BSB have questioned both the barrister and solicitor.

 

The BSB Complaints Commissioner assesses the complaint. If she thinks there is anything in it she sends the complaint to the barrister and the solicitor for their comments, which she did with mine.

 

Then she sends the solicitor and barrister's comments to me for my comments on them.

 

I obvioulsly pointed out that they were lying in several places and also, their two stories did not match in one part, a big part concerning the value of it.

 

The BSB complaints commissioner then assesses it and she either throws it out or, (and this is stated on their website in a document which is intended as advice for barristers that have had complaints made against them,) OR, if she thinks there IS evidence of professional misconduct she will progress the complaint to stage two of the BSB complaints process, which is an assessment by the Complaints Committee.

 

 

Guys, we recieved a letter from the BSB just before xmas stating that our complaint is about to be put before the Complaints Committee (end Jan) :-D:-D:-D:-D:-D

 

This does not necessarily mean he is guilty though, but, the advice they give to barristers is that it is only progressed if the commissioner thinks there is evidence of misconduct.

 

The commitee can either throw out the complaint or call the barrister for a tribunal. We are obviously keeping our fingers crossed for the latter.

 

As for the court part of our claim at the moment, we have just submitted our defence to their counterclaim.

 

In our case RBS admitted in writing that it was wrong and caused all the problems in the first place.

 

A sentence from that letter by RBS to us stated, "Had we carried out your request in a timely and professional manner, i am confident you would not have encountered charges or unpaid items on your account".

 

Now is that an admittal or what guys.

RBS in their attempt to put things right did not acknowledge the fact that we were suffering serious credit problems because of them, we were forced to remortgage for christ's sake purely because we could not obtain a loan which was purely due to RBS credit damage and errors.

 

Just because we could not accept their offer they think they are entitled to be paid twice for the money.

 

In my latest court submission i have show an RBS document from August 06 stating we owe £7.5k. Then after the Ombudsman stepped in they said in October 06 that we only owe £6k, the real sum. We turn down their offer but again in Feb 07 they send us another letter stating we owe £6k. then in June 07 we have another RBS letter saying we owe £7.5k again, which was our accounts plus interest and charges.

 

 

 

They had offered to refund these when they admitted the whole thing was their fault but just because we turn down their offer, which in turn is because they had caused us more damage than they would admit to, i.e. Credit Damage, they think they are entitled to pursue us as though no dispute had ever existed and as though they had never admitted to being the cause of the problem. Cobbetts reckon i can not rely on that letter.

 

On December 18th RBS and Cobbheads submitted their Defence, citing all the usual crap clauses in their crap contracts. They stated we owe them £12k !!

 

Yesterday RBS themselves sent us a letter stating that we owe them £14K.

 

 

I pointed out to the courts their lies and backed up everything i said with documents from either RBs themselves, the Information Commissioners Office, the Ombudsman etc,

 

RBS have denied any knowledge of the Information Commissioners Office involvement but the ico sent me a letter last week stating that they definitely did inform RBS at the time, and they sent me a copy of the letter that was sent to them.

 

I also put in some arguments related to their use of these clauses and the fact that they can now be considered under the unfair contract rules.

 

Sorry guys, i have got carried away again. this post has got far too long.

 

if anyone wants to know what i said regarding these unfair contract rules i would be happy to put in another post.

 

Martin, if you have read this far, please do not ask me for restraint on this. RBS are pure swines, criminals, devious F$**%I$ etc

 

I have proof of everything i say but the most obvious piece of evidence is right in our faces every single day mate.

 

This problem started a couple of months after we got married. We have now been married for 3 years and 4 months. They screwed up all the plans we had for our married lives and our babies first years of lives. One is 4 and the other is 2 and a half.

 

The RBS has severely fu**ed us up and after admitting the errors, but having their offer to ammend the situation turned down due to its inadequacy, the Royal fooooookng Bank of PorridgeGobblingLand has attempted to drive us into the ground and cover up its mistake.

 

We are severely damaged due to bank charges, the automatic application of bank charges, stemming from the use of possible unfair contract clauses.

 

If we get a judgement, and then the OFT turns round and says they think they ARE unfair, RBS does not want people to know about something which could start another avalanche of claims against ALL banks.

 

All the people who have already reclaimed, plus all those waiting, would all go off and check their credit ratings.

 

Should i now go to the police over the alleged bribery now that the BSB has progressed the case to its 2nd stage, indicating they think there is evidence of misconduct. Remember, i paid 2k up front for this barrister so its criminal defrauding in my mind, as well as my solicitor must have been bribed in the first place somehow.

 

Sorry again its a long post.

 

D&M

 

Cheers again everyone for the kind words

:)

Edited by D&M-GIANTKILLERS
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul wlton,

I think i used an extract of your thread as part of my evidence in the complaint against the barrister i have, so thx for that mate.

 

I used extracts from three different threads that all showed reference to Kings Chambers and there association with NatWest and RBS.

 

Cheers

D&M

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...