Letter from egg in response to CCA request.

[cosalt]

Sent a CCA request letter to egg which was received by them on 29th December.

 

They have sent me a letter saying they can not process my request because I have not signed my letter, they have returned the letter & PO asking me to sign the letter and return if I still want a copy of my agreement.

 

I have read elsewhere that I dont need to sign the letter, so I am a little concerned why they want my signature, I do hope its not to recreate an agreement !!

 

Am I correct in saying I dont need to sign, and is there a template for a letter to send them in response.

 

Thanks in advance.

[reallymadwoman]

They're being awkward, however to avoid lengthy arguments, just print your name or sign and then put a big line through it so any cut and paste effort would be obvious.

[lexis200]

Just for clarification though they absolutely do not need a signature in order to send this stuff, and personally I'd be very wary of sending them my actual signature, even doctored (I play round with Photoshop for web design so am reasonably adept with it, and it takes a while but I made a passable attempt at removing a line I put through my sig as a test - I'm sure someone with a proper working knowledge of it could do a far better job). But then I am overly paranoid regarding the banks:D

 

If you do sign, I'd be tempted to add a letter in that you do not normally use, and/or put it on a patterned background which makes the whole idea of lifting it waaay harder to attempt (you can use Photoshop or even Word to do this).

 

Of course the bonus of just changing your sig is that if they do Blue Peter an agreement using it you'll have them by the danglies, so to speak:p

[lexis200]

One other thought - my request to Egg was sent last year too and I've just received it. I used a digital signature (which I use for all bank stuff now) and they didn't query it at all despite the fact it bears no resemblance what so ever to my actual signature. I use Free Handwriting Font Demos - Real Cursive Handwriting Fonts - vLetter.com. You just follow the instructions on screen and copy it into your letters (or in your case just print it onto the form they sent you.)

[cosalt]

I think I am going to sign the letter and write todays date across the signature, what do you reckon ?

[lollipop73]

I sent my CCA to Egg yesterday and included copy of driving licence and copy of phone bill.

 

And added at the bottom

 

 

"I draw your attention to the fact that the Consumer Credit Act 1974 does not require that I supply you a copy of my signature before you comply with my S77/78 request.

I am sending this to you via recorded delivery, a copy of receipt and full print out of the confirmation of delivery will be kept along with a copy of this document for my future reference."

[lexis200]

They just don't need any more information from you than the letter requesting the CCA - they are either stalling or trying to get a sig to fake. I really would just write and tell them there is no requirement for you to sign the request. They have been happy to send all your statements and any letters regarding your account to you at that address - if they suddenly need confirmation you are who you say you are, then they have a serious Data Protection issue for all the stuff they have sent previously.

 

This is a letter I've found on my trawls through the forums that deals with this issue

 

RE Account NO XXXXXXXX

 

Thank you for your letter dated xx/xx/2007 the contents of which are noted

 

In your letter you make reference to requiring my signed authorisation before you comply. I draw your attention to the fact that the Consumer Credit Act 1974 does not require that I supply you a copy of my signature before you comply with my S78 request.

 

If it is for Data Protection purposes then I can happily supply you with documentation to substantiate my identity to you.

 

However, please note that the above address is the one which you normally use to communicate my private business to me and which you have hitherto found to be acceptable.I have to ask if you are concerned that you are corresponding with the correct person why has it taken so long to raise this matter.

 

As you are aware, disclosing data without adequate checks of identity is contrary to the 7th principal of data protection, listed in schedule 1 of the Data protection Act 1998:

 

7. Appropriate technical and organisational measures shall be taken against unauthorised or unlawful processing of personal data and against accidental loss or destruction of, or damage to, personal data.

 

My request for a true copy of my credit agreement under section 78 was made on xx/xx/2007 and the 12 working days for your compliance expire on xx/xx/2007. I note that there is no provision that removes the requirements of the act to provide this information on time, even if you are unsure of my identity.

 

I look forward to receiving the documentation requested.

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

 

I await your rapid response.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

Sorry for the rant, it just really irritates me when the banks behave like this. They know full well what they do and don't require, and they just rely on the fact that we will generally not know and so comply with their instructions.

 

 

Lexis:)

[lollipop73]

Yes-that`s where I lifted my line from.

[cosalt]

They just don't need any more information from you than the letter requesting the CCA - they are either stalling or trying to get a sig to fake. I really would just write and tell them there is no requirement for you to sign the request. They have been happy to send all your statements and any letters regarding your account to you at that address - if they suddenly need confirmation you are who you say you are, then they have a serious Data Protection issue for all the stuff they have sent previously.

 

This is a letter I've found on my trawls through the forums that deals with this issue

 

RE Account NO XXXXXXXX

 

Thank you for your letter dated xx/xx/2007 the contents of which are noted

 

In your letter you make reference to requiring my signed authorisation before you comply. I draw your attention to the fact that the Consumer Credit Act 1974 does not require that I supply you a copy of my signature before you comply with my S78 request.

 

If it is for Data Protection purposes then I can happily supply you with documentation to substantiate my identity to you.

 

However, please note that the above address is the one which you normally use to communicate my private business to me and which you have hitherto found to be acceptable.I have to ask if you are concerned that you are corresponding with the correct person why has it taken so long to raise this matter.

 

As you are aware, disclosing data without adequate checks of identity is contrary to the 7th principal of data protection, listed in schedule 1 of the Data protection Act 1998:

 

7. Appropriate technical and organisational measures shall be taken against unauthorised or unlawful processing of personal data and against accidental loss or destruction of, or damage to, personal data.

 

My request for a true copy of my credit agreement under section 78 was made on xx/xx/2007 and the 12 working days for your compliance expire on xx/xx/2007. I note that there is no provision that removes the requirements of the act to provide this information on time, even if you are unsure of my identity.

 

I look forward to receiving the documentation requested.

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

 

I await your rapid response.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

Sorry for the rant, it just really irritates me when the banks behave like this. They know full well what they do and don't require, and they just rely on the fact that we will generally not know and so comply with their instructions.

 

 

Lexis:)

 

Excellent letter, thanks, forget the signature, thats what I am sending !

 

I think I know what they are up to, they sent me a default notice just before I sent the cca request so they are stalling as the cca 12 + 2 days was up before the default 14 days !

 

Cosalt:)

[lexis200]

Cheeky g**s aren't they?!

 

Thanks for the click:)

[cosalt]

Ok got a reply today, they have obviously now decided I don't need to sign the letter !

 

Basically little point in scanning it up, the letter says they have set me a copy of my signed agreement, together with my terms and conditions.

 

There is no agreement or anything with my signature on in the envelope, just a copy of conditions at the time I took the card out.

 

Any ideas on where to go from here ?

[lexis200]

You're doing better than me - I don't think mine are even related to when the card was issued:rolleyes:

 

You could write and tell them they haven't complied (they haven't - terms and conditions are not a true copy of your agreement. Had they sent you a blank agreement from when you opened your account, along with the historic terms and a set of new terms, then they'd have complied!)

 

They'll say they have.

 

I've been back and forth with creditors with this, and quite frankly, although it was all kind of exciting to begin with, it's now rather tedious, irritating that they hide behind the 'you can exclude a signature' bit, and expensive sending everything recorded.

 

My plan now is ask for the CCA. If they come up with anything other than a perfectly enforceable agreement, let them know once. If they still argue, Subject Access Request them for it. I know it costs a tenner, but if you specifically request something within the Subject Access Request, they have to make all reasonable efforts to find it - they can't simply say 'here's a blank one now sod off'. If/when they don't turn up with one, threaten reporting them to the Information Commissioners Office. If it's still not forthcoming, do report them, but I feel you can rest a little easier as it's pretty likely it's not there if they don't send it within the data request. However, if they do then turn up with it later, they're going to have a pretty hard time explaining why it was not submitted to you when you requested it. Tsk tsk:)

 

Anyway, that's my present tack with them. I'm not quite brave enough to go down the CPR route without first being pushed by them, but obviously if you read up on that and think you'll be ok with it, it is another option. I have done it to BOS, and they ignored me completely.

 

I think that is because the agreement they have is tosh, I told them so and they threw their toys out of the pram and threatened litigation. I was persuaded to call their bluff, and haven't heard a peep since.

[lollipop73]

I got mine back this morning-I didn`t sign it, I quoted part of the leter template and enclosed a photocopy of my drivers licence with the signature blacked out and my electricity bill, no complaints about the sig, just saying they want £10 to send me my transaction history-I will be sending it back to them along with the SAR so I can go through every single thing. It was signed-which is odd because I applied for the card online, so I will be taking it further.

[joneseyblod]

I have found companies try and say either it was not in a relevant filing system, or that it was part of an automated process and we do not have a copy of it.

 

Im writing to the Information Commissioners office about those statements

[lexis200]

From How to satisfy subject access requests | OUT-LAW.COM

 

The benefit of the Data Protection Act 1998 is that it allows data controllers to negotiate with data subjects to get the data subject to specify the exact information he or she wishes to receive.However, if the data subject is adamant that he or she wishes to receive a copy of everything the data controller holds on him or her, then there is very little the data controller can do about this, and a completely exhaustive search of the computerised and manually held data in the organisation will be required.

 

If this is the case, then a request to search all databases and all relevant filing systems (manual files) which are caught by the Act must then be issued throughout the organisation. This request must include all back up and archived files, whether computerised or manual which fall within the application of the Act. It is usual to put a time limit on these requests.

 

 

Emails are subject to subject access, as are archived computerised and manual files and all back up tapes.

 

The bit in bold does not suggest they can say this to you jonseyblod, and I think they are using the 'relevant filing system' bit out of context. If you read the underlined bit, that looks to me like it means files relevant to your search, as opposed to files they just don't look at/can't get so and so therefore consider not relevant.

 

That's my interpretation anyway:)

[joneseyblod]

Ahhh very useful thanks!! My letter clearly stated ALL information held about me and then gave 10 or more examples of what I would expect to be included but re-iterated that was not all. The things they have missed out was on the numbered list.

[lexis200]

No probs, hope it helps.

 

Lexis:)

[Viscount Stair]

There are two delaying tactics and two defences that can "legitimately" be used in response to a Subject Access Request.

 

The first delaying tactic is to ask for proof of ID - that one has been done to death on this board. Interestingly, Egg haven't tried to pull that one on me - not sure why not.

 

The second delaying tactic is asking to specify what information is required: if that really is everything, then it really is everything - so that is, ultimately, just a delaying tactic, no more.

 

The first defence is "relevant filing system". If something genuinely is not in a relevant filing system then it is not personal data and does not have to be produced at all. However, a very pertinent question indeed would be why a document so fundamental to a customer relationship was not in a relevant filing system.

 

The other defence is "disproportionate effort" but that is not a complete defence - all it means is that if you have asked for everything and the kitchen sink, then they can say that they cannot actually print out the kitchen sink but you are welcome to come along to our offices and have a look at it instead.

[joneseyblod]

Very interesting points there!

 

I wonder how agreements cannot be in a relevant filing system!

[militantconsumer]

I'm surprised that Egg are being so awkward because they sent ours straightaway (although we did sign the request letter).

 

For what it's worth, I don't believe there are teams of people faking credit card agreements at Egg Towers in Derby. Having said that, elsewhere on this forum you will find a lot of discussion about what companies are actually required to send you in response to different types of request. I am starting to wonder if it might actually be completely legal to knock out a "true copy" on Photoshop. Sending just terms and conditions seems pretty normal as well.

 

Somewhere on CAG there is a new thread about using a Court form to force the credit company to supply the document that they would rely on if legal action ensued. That document would obviously have to be a copy of the actual real agreement, and if they tried to fake that and then later it turned out that the document they produced in Court was a different one, then I imagine that they would be in real trouble.

[Viscount Stair]

Good point well made.

 

In fairness to Egg, they do seem on the whole to have far fewer problems producing paperwork than other organisations. What their problem seems to be is that their standard agreement whoever drafted their documents was too clever by three quarters.

[militantconsumer]

I just found the thread about using the Civil Procedure Rules part 31.16 instead of a request made pursuant to s77/78 CCA 1974 to get a proper copy of your agreement. It's a long thread, but the first few pages contain most of what you need to know:-

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/173201-why-you-shouldnt-use.html

 

Egg is a fascinating company in the way it grew from nothing to a really popular brand in a short time. A couple of selective personal views about this company:-

1. Its loans and credit card (and probably mortgages) sections were set up as loss leaders to flog the Prudential's overpriced PPI policies.

2. Its impressive 'total marketing' approach (which attracted the young and the cool and the desperate for credit) got in the way of its legal responsibilities. They made the credit agreements too simple and too friendly. Whether this was intended to deliberately mislead people is debatable.

[cosalt]

Got a letter today, they have handed me over to my freinds at Collect Direct ! Need to sort out a letter in reply !