Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So, the two child benefit cap is going to (rightly or wrongly) be a big issue, with the care of kids undoubtedly taking second place to political point scoring  ... Some think that parents should be responsible for kids, and the state pay as little as possible else the parents will just use having kids (which they then neglect) as a means of income for them to spend on fags and booze. Some think that benefits should be effectively there for anyone whatever the circumstances.   So what do people think might be some sort of solution?   I think that both those stances are extremes,  and you can be sure of just a few things 1. Neither or any approach fits all affected. There are some who will abuse the system, just as there are some left in genuine desperate need. 2. None of its the kids fault, and how they are treated will have a large impact on our nations future.   So, despite the claims of 'it means only rich people can have kids' which is rubbish, I think the cap should stay. ... BUT that free school meals should be introduced for all state school kids:   Which would * ensure our nations children kids get fed at least one meal a day with the funds intended for that * be a significant incentive to go to school for the poorer kids at least - keeping many off the streets and away from bad company * almost certainly reduce problems and increase productivity in the classroom from irritable hungry kids (per stats)   Not a perfect solution by any means - but seems a positive move to me.    
    • and more positive change From next year, mobile phone, paid television and broadband companies must inform customers of any price rises at the point of sale. The changes, ordered by Ofcom, will come into force on 17 January and mean that any mid-contract price rises must be given “in pounds and pence” and in a “clear and comprehensible” way.   Taken a change of government to do it after years of bluster about it eh?   Mobile phone companies banned from hiking prices mid-contract based on inflation WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK The new year plan ensures providers are transparent on prices at the point of sale  
    • Could he/ his partner set up a new internet bank account?  In his name ? It depends which country, I imagine. Most UK banks want proof of address and ID, probably more. If your friend/partner can use the house address and provide bills that could help. You would need to look at various online banks and see what their requirements are. Or there are expat accounts but I haven't looked closely at how they work. Could I then get his pension diverted to that new account?  That would at least cover some costs  ( ie epc/ storage) I'd have thought the DWP would pay to a new account, as long as the person they're authorised to deal with asks them and provides details. The international pensions people in Newcastle are pretty helpful.
    • HB - he has certainly given me a challenge ! I set a plan in motion. A refinance plan that would have enabled me to take time to sell one asset and sort out another for him.   The bank account blockage has hindered the plan.  His partner seems to think I can do everything w/o paying anyone for anything.  I don't mind helping - but it's not normal to clear out 2 properties, organize storage or sale of possessions, get properties ready for sale/ rent - w/o being paid.  He has the money to pay for things and services - and for my help - but the blockage prevents that. If the refinance plan could still be actioned then at least I would have some time to sell one asset.  Could he/ his partner set up a new internet bank account?  In his name ? Could I then get his pension diverted to that new account?  That would at least cover some costs  ( ie epc/ storage)
    • It's a shame that your friend didn't take care of this while he had capacity and before he left the country, isn't it? He seems to have made your mission impossible. HB
  • 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
      • 162 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

Identification for SAR to a DCA - ok to send?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5544 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

I sent a DCA a Subject Access Request and the DCA have responded (AFTER 40 days and my threatening them with court action) asking for ID, one being photographic eg passport and the other confirmation of my address eg driving licence.

 

These are the only two identifications I can really send them anyway as I have nothing else. Sending them my ID seems a bad idea to me.

 

I just need to know whether it is safe to do so as they will obvioulsy know my full name, date of birth etc as at the moment they only know my initial and address. It doesnt involve any money, just my forcing them to show me the information they have (or not) to substantiate a mark on credit file.

 

They also say the 40 days will commence AFTER they've received the further ID - is this correct? This doesnt seem right.

 

I was thinking of phoning the Information Comissioner on Monday to let them know they are in breach/ask for advice - is there any point in my doing that? The DCA have NEVER asked for my ID previously.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell them that they have been communicatingwith you at that address so must have been happy with your identity prior to the SAR. There is somethingin the OFT guidelines which says this - but better than I can! Also you made the request and I am sure that the 40 days starts from when you made it not when they decide!

 

I woudln't send them anything just in case they 'lose it' and certainly don't send your driving licence - it has your signature on it and allegedly DCAs could allegedly lift the signature off the driving licence and allegedly paste it onto a CCA.

  • Haha 1

Welshwizard QC (Quite Content):rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.. it just seems a bad idea for me to send them ID when THEY are in default of my request. I still they have their letters, including their demands for payment. If they are not sure about my identity they are in breach with the OFT guidelines as well.. though they probably already know that.

 

Its so obvious that they waited until the 40 days were up and THEN requested ID!

 

I know I've seen a letter saying they have been happy to assume my identity is correct etc... concerning a CCA but I havent seen one for a SAR.

 

I will ring the Information Commissioner on Monday and see what they say.

Edited by tooblueskies
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Sir,

 

You have stipulated that you require proof of my identity/signature before you comply with my SAR, may I bring the following to your attention;

Data Protection Act Good Practice Notes:

 

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/practical_application/checklist_for_handling_requests_for_personal_information.pdf

 

2. Do you have enough information to be sure of the requester’s identity?

Often you will have no reason to doubt a person’s identity. For example, if a person with whom you have regular contact sends a letter from their known address it may be safe to assume that they are who they say they are.

 

Suffice to say that if the Information Commissioners Office are satisfied that if you have previously corresponded with me at this address then it is reasonable that I am the person I say I am, therefore there is no leglislation nor guidelines that you can hide behind in an attempt to avoid fullfilling my legal request,

 

Yours,

Print name do not sign.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ahh.. great.. thanks! No doubt they will come back with some other excuse.

 

They dont know that I know about the mark on my credit file. I was gonna leave that till later to use as a "show me the info or remove it" demand AFTER they admit they have nothing on me.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...