Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks again for the advice Andyorch - will do as you say - radio silence
    • thers no point the UK gov doing anything but is there?   Once the UK 's singapore on Thames financial antics and rights and regs bonfire gets more obviously underway, the UK will lose anything they already have that isn't in the EU's benefit. The EU is seeing very small problems compared to the UK's loss of financial access and 3rd country customs regs.   Scottish independence and Irish reunification; all in the EU; coming down the tracks like the flying Scotsman on a full head of steam  SNP expected to increase their MPs, Johnson starting to get his pheasents revolting (like Patels recent critiques) ... Putin and the extreme right American billionaire club in a two pronged attack has effectively ended the UK without firing a missile.  
    • Okay.....alleged debt chasing with no reference numbers or agreement numbers...they really do still work in the dark ages. So wait now until Ambulance chasers Global Debt write.....then come back here for further advice....in the meantime radio silence.
    • Its states so when they do a Land Registry search...... " Co-owner in listed property.. "   If you do not wish to fight this and want to simply resolve it then you could consider submitting an N245 and make a monthly proposed affordable payment. The Judgment will remain for 6 years on the credit files and the Charge until the debt has been paid off.   The fee is £50...but once its in place there is nothing else they can do to execute the  judgment.     Regards   Andy  
    • Thanks for your reply Andyorch - Unfortunately there are no credit card account numbers quoted in the letter to identify which credit card company is involved. It just states the outstanding balance and that the original lender is SAV Credit. It only has the Cabot/Global Debt Recovery reference numbers for this debt.  Did a quick internet search and SAV credit was also known as Newday Cards Ltd - neither of which I recognise.   Thanks Paul
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

LLoyds SAR signature request - time limit to comply


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4234 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I received a reply to my SAR to Lloyds with a request for my signature. I've sent a copy back to them (crossed through) and was just wondering if they have to adhere to the 40 day limit from the date the original SAR was received, or from the date they receive my signature?

 

Can anyone tell me please. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

40 calendar days from the date of the original request...out of interest what reason did they give for requesting a signature?

DCA's - they have the same power as an infinite number of untrained chimps working on a script for Hamlet, but the chimps would probably at least get it right :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

should of sent them this

 

Dear Sirs,

RE Account NO XXXXXXXX

Thank you for your letter dated xx/xx/2008 the contents of which are noted.

In your letter you make reference to requiring my signed authorisation /specimen signature** 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 S77/78** 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 to date you have happily sent statements and correspondence containing extensive sensitive private information to my address. 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?

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 77/78** was made on xx/xx/2008 and the 12 working days for your compliance expire on xx/xx/2008. 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

Yours faithfully

Print dont Sign

PGH7447

 

 

Getting There Slowly

---------

 

Advice is given freely but is in no way meant to be taken as Gospel:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for your responses folks. I sent a variation of that letter PGH as it was for an SAR. Just thought it would save time by adding a crossed signature too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason for asking for a signature for a SAR can be for identification purposes.

 

They have admitted that they don't have an up to date signature so there is no need to send one, because they can't use it to confirm your identity. Presumably they want it for some other purpose, so be careful.

 

I would be tempted to walk into Lloyds armed with ID & their letter & tell them to record that you have identified yourself as the person making the request (but not allow them to make copies of the id because the act doesn't allow them to demand that)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Information Commissioners Office guidelines on data protection are quite clear on this.

 

In section 2 they quote "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"

Credit card companies are increasingly using the signature excuse for not supplying documents. As 2Grumpy says, be very careful. Did you scan and keep a copy of the signed letter that you sent them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The general reason for demanding a signature is either

 

1. because they can

2. it's their industry standard

3. it's their policy.

 

None of these is a good enough reason

Link to post
Share on other sites

2Grumpy, what you say in post #6 makes such sense now, I didn't think of that, its all scary stuff! Sadly its too late now as I've already sent the letter off. Wish I'd had this info before.

 

No Vint, I didn't keep a copy of the letter with the signature on, but I wish I had. I did cross it through with big crosses - hopefully they won't be able to do anything too sinister with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2Grumpy, what you say in post #6 makes such sense now, I didn't think of that, its all scary stuff! Sadly its too late now as I've already sent the letter off. Wish I'd had this info before.

 

No Vint, I didn't keep a copy of the letter with the signature on, but I wish I had. I did cross it through with big crosses - hopefully they won't be able to do anything too sinister with that.

 

Hopefully not, but you should be able to tell if they try.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...