Letter from egg in response to CCA request.

[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.)

[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:)

[lexis200]

Cheeky g**s aren't they?!

 

Thanks for the click:)

[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.

[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:)

[lexis200]

No probs, hope it helps.

 

Lexis:)