Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi Just to be clear a Notice to Quit is only the very start of the Housing Association going down the Eviction route there is a long process to go. Also to be clear if you leave at the Notice to Quit date only and go to the Council claiming you are Homeless they will more than likely class you as Intentionally Homeless therefore you have no right to be given temporary housing by the Council. The only way that works is when the Court has Granted a Possession Order then you can approach the Council as Homeless with the Court Order. As for the Housing Association issuing the Notice to Quit because there investigation has proved it's not your main residence but you have witness statement to prove otherwise. From now on with the Housing Association you need to keep a very good paper trail and ensure to get free proof of posting from the post office with anything you send to them. You now need to make a Formal Complaint to the Housing Association and please amend the following to suit your needs:   Dear Sir/Madam FORMAL COMPLAINT Reference: Notice to Quit Letter Dated XX/XX/2024, Hand Delivered on XX/XX/2024 I note in your letter that you stated that the Housing Association has carried out an investigation into myself and came to the conclusion that I am not using this property as my main residence and have evidence of this and have therefore issued a 'Notice to Quit' by XX/XX/2024. I find the above actions absolutely disgraceful action by the Housing Association. 1. Why have I never been informed nor asked about this matter by my Housing Officer. 2. Why have I never been given the opportunity to defend myself before the Housing Association out of the blue Hand Delivered a Notice to Quit Letter. 3. I have evidence and witnesses/statements that prove this is my Main Residence and more than willing provide this to both the Housing Association and the Court. I now require the following: 1. Copy of your Complaints Policy (not the leaflet) 2. Copy of your Customer Care Charter (not the leaflet) 3. Copies of your Investigation into this not being my main residence.    As well as the above you need to send the Housing Association urgently a Subject Access Request (SAR) requesting 'ALL DATA' that simple phrase covers whatever format they hold that in whether it be letters, email, recorded calls etc. The Housing Association then has 30 calendar days to respond but that time limit only starts once they acknowledge your SAR Request. If they fail to respond within that time limit its then off with a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO).     
    • Hi Sorry for the delay in getting back to you The email excuse and I do say excuse to add to your account and if court decide LL can't recoup costs will be removed is a joke. So I would Ask them: Ask them to provide you with the exact terms within your Tenancy Agreement that allows them to add these Court Fees to your Account before it has been decided in Court by a Judge. Until the above is answered you require these Court Fees to be removed from your Account (Note: I will all be down to your Tenancy Agreement so have a good look through it to see what if any fees they can add to your account in these circumstances)
    • Thank you for your responses. As requested, some more detail. Please forgive, I'm writing this on my phone which always makes for less than perfect grammar. My Dad tries but English not his 1st language, i'm born and bred in England, a qualified accountant and i often help him with his admin. On this occasion I helped my dad put in his renewal driving licence application around 6 weeks before expiry and with it the disclosure of his sleep apnoea. Once the licence expired I told him to get in touch with his GP, because the DVLA were offering only radio silence at that time (excuses of backlogs When I called to chase up). The GP charged £30 for an opinion letter on his ability to drive based on his medical history- at the time I didn't take a copy of the letter, but I am hoping this will be key evidence that we can rely on as to why s88 applies because in the GP opinion they saw no reason he couldn't drive i need to see the letter again as im going only on memory- we forwarded the letter in a chase up / complaint to the DVLA.  In December, everything went quiet RE the sleep apnoea (i presume his GP had given assurance) but the DVLA noticed there had been a 2nd medical issue in the past, when my father suffered a one off mini stroke 3 years prior. That condition had long been resolved via an operation (on his brain of all places, it was a scary time, but he came through unscathed) and he's never had an issue since. We were able to respond to that query very promptly (within the 14 days) and the next communication was the licence being granted 2 months later. DVLA have been very slow in responding every step of the way.  I realise by not disclosing the mini stroke at the time, and again on renewal (had I known I'd have encouraged it) he was potentially committing an offence, however that is not relevant to the current charge being levied, which is that he was unable to rely on s88 because of a current medical issue (not one that had been resolved). I could be wrong, I'm not a legal expert! The letter is a summons I believe because its a speeding offence (59 in a temp roadworks 50 limit on the A1, ironically whist driving up to visit me). We pleaded guilty to the speeding but not guilty to the s87.  DVLA always confirmed to me on the phone that the licence had not been revoked and that he "May" be able to continue to drive. They also confirmed in writing, but the letter explains the DVLA offer no opinion on the matter and that its up to the driver to seek legal advice. I'll take the advice to contact DVLA medical group. I'm going to contact the GP to make sure they received the SAR request for data, and make it clear we need to see a copy of the opinion letter. In terms of whether to continue to fight this, or to continue with the defence, do we have any idea of the potential consequences of either option? Thanks all
    • stopping payments until a DN arrives does not equal automatic sale to a DCA...if you resume payments after the DN.  
    • Sleep apnoea: used to require the condition  to be “completely” controlled Sometime before June 2013 DVLA changed it to "adequately" controlled. I have to disagree with MitM regarding the effect of informing DVLA and S.88 A diagnosis of sleep apnoea doesn't mean a licence wont be granted, and, indeed, here it was. If the father sought medical advice (did he?) : this is precisely where S.88 applies https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/64edcf3a13ae1500116e2f5d/inf1886-can-i-drive-while-my-application-is-with-dvla.pdf p.4 for “new medical condition” It is shakier ground if the opinion of a healthcare professional wasn’t sought. in that case it is on the driver to state they believed they met the medical standard to drive. However, the fact the licence was then later granted can be used to be persuasive that the driver’s belief they met the standard was correct. What was the other condition? And, just to confirm, at no point did DVLA say the licence was revoked / application refused? I’d be asking DVLA Drivers’ Medical Group why they believe S.88 doesn’t apply. S.88 only applies for the UK, incidentally. If your licence has expired and you meet the conditions for S.88 you can drive in the U.K., but not outside the U.K. 
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Kriskros -v- Morgan Stanley / Barclaycard


kriskros
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5358 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

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Well Well!

I had a reply from Barclacard today after I SAR'ed them for all four of my credit card accounts with them. The advice from this forum was that a single tenner would cover ALL the data they hold on me. The Barks beg to differ. They state:

"We are processing the SAR on your account ending xxxx. Please enclose a further three chegues for the standard amount of 10.00 each and we will process the other three."

Can they do that? Any advice or opinions?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Well!

I had a reply from Barclacard today after I SAR'ed them for all four of my credit card accounts with them. The advice from this forum was that a single tenner would cover ALL the data they hold on me. The Barks beg to differ. They state:

"We are processing the SAR on your account ending xxxx. Please enclose a further three chegues for the standard amount of 10.00 each and we will process the other three."

Can they do that? Any advice or opinions?

 

Hmm it depends if each company is a separately registered company as per the data protection act I believe.

 

But yes if they are seperate companies then it will be £10 each.. JDWilliams's (parent company I cant remember the name of) and all its little offshoot companies give the same problem, a £10 to each company:eek:

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. That looks an interesting bit of kit. Will have to study it more as all the cards say Barclaycard on them

 

Then £10 is for all info they hold on you, not each account held with the one registered name... might be worth reminding them of this and suggesting you are happy to consult the ICO with a complaint if they dont comply :-D

 

Are they really that desperate for money? [Rhetorical question, please dont answer :-D, I already know its a YES]

 

s.

Link to post
Share on other sites

£10 will get you all the info that Barclays PLC hold on you, regardless of the trading names used.

 

For example- "Barclaycard", "Woolwich", "Goldfish" etc are simply trading names of Barclays PLC and have the same data controller as defined by the Act.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys. I have drafted the following letter for them. Can anyone suggest anything I should change, add or remove from it?

I refer to your letter dated 10th August 2009 in which you wrongly demand a payment of £10.00 for EACH account that I hold with you.

I am sure that you are aware that "Barclaycard", "Morgan Stanley" and "Goldfish" are trading names of Barclays PLC and have the same Data Controller as defined by the Act.

Therefore, as you have already received the required payment of £10.00 from me, you are obliged to supply ALL the data that you hold on me for every account and for the entire period of my dealings with you. I enclose my original request again for your convenience.

You have forty days from the date you received my original request (4th August 2009) to provide this required information.

If you choose not to comply, I will be happy to consult with the Information Commissioners Office with a complaint.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Change this to "If you choose not to comply, I will be happy to consult with the Information Commissioners Office with a complaint or begin legal action in the Courts to enforce your statutory obligation"

Lose the "Morgan Stanley" from the above- MS is not a trading name of Barclays. What happedn was that MS sold their UK credit card business to Goldfish- Goldfish was then swallowed up by Barclays and Goldfish became a trading name.

 

(MS allowed Goldfish to use the MS name on former MS accounts and credit card literature)

Link to post
Share on other sites

:)

 

I really, really loath and detest Mods and have done since 1979.

 

Fishtail parka wearing, scooter riding, wastes of oxygen.

 

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!

 

I'll go and have a lie down, now!

 

(I'm 45 by the way, but part of me is still 15!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear!

I was dragged up through the Rock 'n Roll years but from the bits I remember, these scooter riding chappies did not cause me much grief. I always thought that they were a bit... shall we say odd though. :confused:

Each to his own I suppose :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello again,

The Barclays folk are induging in some good old fashioned harassment now - using automated dialling to my landline and mobile- not to mention the continuous text messages as well. This happens several times every day and goes on over the weekend

I intend to send the following letter to them tomorrow but would appreciate any advice or comments first

Dear sir / madam,

I am writing to express my serious concerns regarding the ongoing automated telephone calls and text messages that I am receiving from your company, which occur several times daily – starting early in the morning and continuing late into the night. This is distressing for me and my family and I am advising you that they are now being logged in order to gather evidence.

You are aware that the credit card accounts I hold with you are in dispute as I am still awaiting a proper response from you to my request for copies under section 77 and 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and also a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act 1988.

Your harassment places you in breach of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 and the Protection from Harassment Act 1970. I am therefore formally repeating my demand that all such harassment ceases immediately and further correspondence should be made in writing only.

You are also in breach of the Wireless Telegraphy Act (1949) and, as such, If you continue to call, I will report you to both Trading Standards and The Office of Fair Trading. Take further note that continued telephone calls after the receipt of a request not to call may constitute a criminal offence under Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003.

You will be deemed to have been served notice of my request and I will deem it served by 27th August 2009.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool, but they wont take a blind bit of notice. You'll just have to put up with this nonsense until their 40 days are up.

 

If you dont get all the info you want, sue them ASAP- the muppetry will cease as soon as your claim is served on them.

 

If you do get all the info you want, sue them ASAP, the muppetry will cease as soon as your claim is served on them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see...

Your two options seem very similar. :D

Most of the calls are not withheld

These are the calls I logged for today. There may have been more:

Mon 24-08

08:29 Silent call Landline 0845 401911

13:01 Silent call Landline 0845 401911

13:51 Unanswered Mobile 0800 135333

17:03 Silent call Landline 0845 401911

19:18 Silent call Landline 0845 401911

19:47 Silent call Landline 0845 401911

Link to post
Share on other sites

get on to the Ofcom site and find out how to make a complaint about silent calls.

 

It wont stop them, but Ofcom will monitor calls from 0845 401911 and complaint will contribute to another £50,000 fine for Sharkleys.

 

They can only legally get away with a small proportion of silent calls.

 

The info is on the Ofcom website.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The story so far.

After SARing the Barks and subsequently rebuking them for trying to extort a tenner for each of the four accounts I hold with them, they backed off and I eventually received copies of statements from August 2003 to August 2009 for all accounts. I also received some printouts of status codes etc

No sign of any agreements though and each account goes back six years even though all of them were in existence long before that. Seems dodgy or what?

Anyway, do I need to send them an LBA of some sort or do we head for the Courts without further ado?

On a seperate note, I had a most apologetic letter from them last week promising that the harrassment would stop by last Monday.

It didn't!

:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...