Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • But I'm not mixing and matching. Sure, when researching I do check multiple avenues, but when speaking, I will open a single post. The Fb post was made in March, it is now June, time has passed, and when the suggestion was made, no further information was given on how I should progress beyond "send a letter", which has meant that I've needed to start another stream - this one, but only after taking the time to research first.
    • hes not turning you away he is simply saying that you should stick to one channel of advice. he is perfectly happy with that channel being this forum, and he will help you   all he is saying, and I agree, is that you should stick to one help channel, not mix and match 3/4
    • As long as we are clear . Do the reading and post your letter of claim in draft form as requested and we can go from there.    
    • Hold on @BankFodder, that was a bit harsh. I spoke with the EVRi complaints Facebook group to begin with, a user on that group told me to send a letter but didn't give any specifics. Here at CAG, I was looking more for specific help as I've never raised such a claim before, and wanted to be sure that my claim was correct, which is why I've researched information with the other groups too, to be sure; but you seem to have assumed that I've made some form of contact with the other groups, such that I find your comments and tone to be very unfair. And I do know a thing or two about forums, that forum users are unpaid volunteers, I happen to be a Tableau Ambassador, and so perform a very similar role helping others in an unpaid capacity  
  • 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

Help pls , where next


puffa
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6536 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

Hi all,

 

Have just recieved a letter after i sent the Registered Mail letter concerning the Microfiche records.

 

Here is the letter i recieved and where do i go from here ? any ideas?

 

Thank you for your letter dated 8th July 2006 rearding your request for a copy of the transactional data held about your abnk account. I'm sorry for the delay in my reply.

I confirm that you have been given all the transaction details you are entitled to under the data Protection Act as you have been provided with all the transactional details that are held on our systems.

Any previous transactions have been archived onto microfiche and it is not possible to provide you with a computer printout of this information. As these microfiche records are not held as part of a relevant filing system, they are not covered by the Data Protection Act and will not therefore be supplied to you under a section 7 Data Protection Act request. However, i confirm that arrangements have been made for the microfiche records to be sent to you in due course.

Please be assured i've carried out a full investigation for you and hope you feel i've offered a fair response to all of the issues you've raised. I'll keep your file open for the next eight weeks and if i dont hear from you within that time , i'll assume that everything is resolved and will close your file.

If you remain dissatisfied though, the leaflet you'll find with this letter explains your rights and how to take your complaint further with Abbey. The leaflet also explains your ultimate right to refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

 

 

 

 

Anyone else had this one ?

 

Look forward to any help :-)

 

Thanks

Data Protection Letter Sent 26/06/06

 

Recieved Printouts 03/08/06

 

Prelim sent 12/09/06

 

LBA sent 26/09/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

This appears to be the standard response from Abbey.

 

Send them this, adapted for your circumstances.

 

Data Protection Act 1998 Disclosure Request

Account Number:

I am in receipt of your letter dated XX/07/06 outlining that you could only provide me with printouts covering recent transactions on my account, because any information prior to May 2004 has been archived onto microfiche. Further I acknowledge receipt of the information you forwarded.

My request was for a complete list of transactions and charges relating to my account since my account was opened, in short a list of charges with dates and amounts. Alternatively a complete set of account statements for that period will be acceptable. This should be retrievable from your accounting systems and easy for you to produce. I will accept a computer print out of these transactions.

I am aware that you have been willing and able to provide other customers with a print-out of transaction information covering this period and am ready to bring this to the attention of the Information Commissioner should it prove necessary. I would also draw your attention to Smith v Lloyds TSB Bank plc (2005) EWHC 246 (Ch).

This letter has been sent by first class recorded delivery and therefore should have reached you by XX/07/06. I have no doubt that you will be aware, as of this date you have just XX days in which to comply with my request. As stated above, a complete set of account statements for the period in question will be acceptable; however, I expect this to be provided within the time period for Data Protection Act compliance.

Should there be any further attempts to delay compliance, I will be left with no alternative but to commence a County Court action under section 7, and section 15(2) of the Data Protection Act 1998, and in due course, escalate this matter into an official complaint to the Information Commissioner and the FSA.

Yours faithfully,

iGroup (GE Money) - AoS Filed late, defence late, amended defence also late despite extra time requested and granted.

Vanquis - Claim issued, no AoS or Defence received

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much :)

 

Going in the post today

Data Protection Letter Sent 26/06/06

 

Recieved Printouts 03/08/06

 

Prelim sent 12/09/06

 

LBA sent 26/09/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...