Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Meat smugglers using English vehicles to evade border checks - Farmers Weekly WWW.FWI.CO.UK Criminal gangs are buying English-registered coaches and vans to smuggle large amounts of illegal meat into the country, Farmers Weekly has learned.  
    • I've used payslip, passport, driving licence, still can't identify me, everything is upto date address etc, 1 attempt left then it blocks me H
    • Thanks for the replies and sorry, as it seems I haven't communicated my question clearly. I'm not after advice about how to deal with the situation I'm in. I'm on top of that and sent a SAR to Scottish Widows the day before I sent one to the FOS. My query was around the FOS interpretation of personal data and the extent of their obligations under GDPR, hence the original title They have said that "personal data is defined as any information relating to an [...] identifiable natural person (‘data subject’)" They then define an identifiable natural person as "one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as [...] an identification number. My view is that I have a complaint reference number, which identifies a complaint raised by me about the administration of my pension so it therefore indirectly identifies me If I'm right, then I believe that all the data related to my complaint is personal data about me, including the screen shot that purportedly establishes that I received my statements. I was hoping there might be someone with better knowledge of GDPR that can clarify whether I'm right or wrong before I react to the FOS's failure to disclose  
    • Please bear with me here i shall try and make this short but with all the detail, but i need help ASAP as there is limited time allowed for this process. I have been with my company 4 years and have advanced through the technical ranks to my current position,  we have an annual report which goes from 0-4 and for three years i have never scored lower than a 3. I was promoted to the role i am in now as an area quality assurance lead and the location was for the NE ( i live in the NW) eventually a similar role became available for another role in the NW. I asked my line manager if he minded me applying for it and he had no issues, i applied sat the multi stage interview and was given the role. My role is now classed as "at risk" of redundancy as we are moving from 4 regions to two which means they are also moving from 4 roles to two roles in my position. Two people are considered safe and myself and another at risk, my question is what is the criteria to separate safe from at risk . In the documentation received from my company it is below, i have zero issues and i know cv against cv mine wins, i was even selected by the company as a company mentor because of my experience in engineering and leadership. This is a closed group of maybe ten people and i am the only non senior executive included.    ·         Performance and Behaviour : I have zero behaviour issues, no issues with performance from my current line manager.  ·         Performance Improvement/ Disciplinary Records   : Zero disciplinary's and no performance issues, in fact my line manager on record has said I'm forthcoming ·         End Of Year Rating : Issues explained below Now my line manager was leaving the company and he did tell me "there was some politics involved with you getting that role, the city build manager and head of area build had promised it to their lead engineer (something they had no right to promise as it has to go though the process ) anyway from day 1 it became very clear that i would not be accepted for this reason within their community although i did just try to help them achieve quality and specification as that was my role. After a few weeks it became very apparent as to why the role had been promised to their man, i found issues where properties had been signed off as ready to accept subscribers when they were not ready (for bonus and stat reasons) and several quality issues i discovered which we could remedy and improve our productivity (unfortunately this would highlight that these issues had been there and not dealt with) My new head of area build (part of this trilogy of him, city build manager and lead engineer)  clearly did not want me there (for the reasons stated) but paid lip service, i had highlighted that i needed to walk off some structured with our canter of excellence counterparts ( as this was part of my role to link in with them for national issues) and he responded by saying i am not to walk them off, and that we have sufficient engineers to do that task (by saying this he could make sure that the engineers would take them round to structures that are A not the ones i have highlighted, and B would have very minor issues) This battle went back and forth over the months where i tried my best to build up the relationship with  them, my attitude was ok you have made some mistakes here, but we are all a team and even though you have hidden issues i can help you remedy them and hopefully we can do so and keep them off the radar,  but they just never did, So moving forward to October last year (2023) this is getting near to annual review time, now i had helped the company out massively by working a substantial amount of weekends and nights to fix issues, and i said i would take most of the time as TOIL ( as agreed with by my previous head of area build) this was 30 days. My current head of area build said i needed to put my leave in as it had been flagged as having a large amount. When i did input the leave (it would result in me taking all of December off) he was unhappy with me and was extremely curt in his responses as he could find nothing on the system for my TOIL , i explained the situation, my line manager would ask if i could work the hours, i would, and when i wanted leave he would authorise (we had an good working relationship, he was an excellent manager) he ended up going to HR to ask their advice and a teams call was set up with myself, head of area build and HR, it was confirmed by HR that it was a company error, when you want to input TOIL there should be a dropdown option in the leave menu and one of the options would be TOIL, this had not been setup on mine. So the company authorised the leave explaining that this should have been done and hadn't, i did say that this is the way it had always been and pretty much everyone on my team then operated this way, TOIL had never been discussed and none of had this option available. So i entered my leave from 4th December - 2nd January,  My line manager was an outside contractor and was leaving the company on the 15th December. On my return i found that we had a new head of area build, it would be a temporary position as they were not going to fill the position permanently and he would be covering his role (Scotland) and this role (NW). I contacted him to say that i had not received my end of year report yet and when would this happen as i had not sat with my line manager tor mine. A little over a week later my HoAB and i had a teams call, it was a introduction meeting and end of year report, he said that he had received feedback from the outgoing manager and he had given me a 2 (i have as explained before never scored lower than a 3) he asked hoe long i had been in the current role (just over a year) as this grade can mean you are new to the role and need a little supervision, haven't built up relationships with stakeholders etc. So he explained what my grade and bonus would be and if i had any feedback, i explained that this was unfair, i had proof that i had not met my targets (i say targets as there were never really any set, but going from emails and conversation we have had, and the job description) i had even created Powerpoint presentations which were very complex into how our network works from beginning to end  as there was distinct lack of knowledge here and i am a lead trainer / assessor (this btw he was extremely impressed with) He did say he had spoken to people in the centre of excellence which o believe was the head of operations, and he did look confused as to the disparity in feedback from them and the original manager that wrote my report. I contacted HR to raising my concerns that i had not sat with my line manager to go through my report,  had i had the chance to do so, i could have rebutted anything said as i had proof of my achievements even though he had set no defined targets, i could prove that i had been extremely active in identifying and remedying issues, HR did come back to me and these are their comments  1) "Your rating was submitted by your manager at the time xxx xxxxxx and he should have carried out an EOY review with you. The rating would not have been provided in this review but feedback should have been shared" [this never happened] 2)  Initial ratings where then discussed and reviewed during a calibration process (for your team) this will have included HOABs and RDs. During this session ratings can be challenged and changed. I can confirm that your rating was not changed as a result of this session and it remained at the rating that xxx submitted. 3) xxx did provide thorough feedback to xxx xxx in a handover so if not already done so it may be worth speaking with him to understand that feedback further.   4) In terms of reputation and the concern you share – ratings are not made public and are private to each individual. 5) And this first line obviously is incorrect " As far as i can see this would be the only separator they could have measured me on to separate safe from not safe, and if so the company did not follow its own procedure. My current line manager said " an error had occurred as you had not received the option to  sir with your manager for your review, and the company needs to make sure this error does not happen again) Well then they are admitting there was an issue and it needs remedying not sweeping under the carpet. All of this is documented. To remind the rating of a 2 is not a concerning grade. Please see descriptor below Generally, needs little supervision but does on occasion require direction/supervision. Does not always anticipate changes to the work environment and could adapt more quickly. May be seen as a strong performer in certain situations or by some audiences but may not perform at that level in all situations. May need some development or guidance to carry out some elements of role. May not consistently demonstrate the right behaviours. May have been on Performance Improvement during the year but has since shown strong improvement        
    • Also, what is the value of the dress and have you refunded the purchaser?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Vanquis - full refund of all charges plus interest accrued **WON**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5125 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

Ok, one for the experts...in the absence of a speadsheet, I've attempted my own calculation of adding the interest, hopefully its correct!.....Vanquis charge an monthly interest rate of 3.991% so I've added to each charge a monthly commulative 3.991% interest rate from when the charge was put on the acccount, to give me an upto date figure that I should reclaim for each charge.....(I havent yet added 8% statutory interest yet)...Is this the correct way to get a true reclaim figure??

 

cheers

If you search for threads started by Banker rhyms with, he explains it all in a thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

When Vanquis issued the default notice did you keep the envelop it came in? When I was having problems with them about reclaiming charges they sent me a default notice but the crafty so and so's back dated the date on the notice so that it came within the required 14 days obligatory notice but actually only gave me 7 days. I pulled them up on this and they withdrew it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

There was no date on the envelope, odd, also no date of issue on the default notice as well....I posted a scan on the 'anatomy of a default' thread, and feedback suggests it might well be non-compliant...I have made an interim payment on the account, but today recieved my copy of the SAR...What a complete load of unintelligble waffle!...pages and pages of imcomprehensible data!...The only things I can work out is that they have got the total amount of penalty charges accured totally wrong! and I've the account statements to prove it!...Also my understanding of a SAR is that its supposed to include credit agreements, whether online apps or written credit agreements, copies of statements etc...as you can probably guess, I've recieved none of those...can anyone advise me of my next step, is it time to take the plunge and start court proceedings?

 

many thanks

 

AJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Write back to Vanquis and thank them for the documentation so far received but it is incomplete and list the documents you require as being outstanding. If they have exceed their 40 days state so, if there are some days remaining tell them that they have so many days to comply with your request. You could say whilst writing that you would like to point out that the default notice issued is invalid and as such you expect it to be removed from the CRAs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Surprise...I'll get on it before the weekend....They still have 7 days to comply with the original SAR...I'm going to hold fire on the charges reclaim until I have all the documentation from the SAR to refer from (there are a few statements from 2006 that I cant find)...one question, if they havent sent a complete SAR within the 40 day period, does the account automatically go in dispute?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to complain to the ICO and explain that Vanquish have not complied with your SAR request. Say to Vanquish if they fail to comply within the given time it will leave you no alternative but to make an official complaint to the ICO. That worked with Morgan Stanley when I had problems getting the paperwork out of them and the ICO did get in touch with them as Morgan Stanley referred to it in their letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

when did you take out the card - pre the 2006 amendment which came in april 2007 (I hope)?

 

online in 2006, doesnt require signed CA as far as I know (distance selling regulations act 2004?)..I'm not challenging the CA, just wanted an accurate SAR containing all information and documents on the account..I'm challenging unfair penalty charges and needed a comprehensive list of penalty charges added to the account...They havent complied with that part. On the SAR, there is just one entry giving an overall total of the charges applied, and the figure they've supplied is way off the mark

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right,

 

I've had a read through. What has happened is that you've sent a CCA request, which I think they complied with in all likelihood. You've then gone on about CCA 78(6) dispute which I dont think is right anyway.

 

At this point, they get the hump because you are (most likely) wrong and they think you are trying to not pay so they start getting the hump big time - make sense?

 

That's my take on where your at from the limited knowledge of you I have from a few posts.

 

You dont say when you SAR'd them I dont think. Did you specify exactly what you wanted in the SAR? You need to write back and be explicit about exactly what information you want from them. Itemised statements from beginning to now showing ALL PPI payments, charges and interest as INDIVIDUAL transactions. Give the a further 7 days to comply, remind them you are legally entitled etc.

 

Yes, I believe you were mis-sold PPI so tick that off and vanquis have some ridiculous charges as well I think.

 

hope that helps

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right,

 

I've had a read through. What has happened is that you've sent a CCA request, which I think they complied with in all likelihood. You've then gone on about CCA 78(6) dispute which I dont think is right anyway.

 

agreed...I didnt realise at that time that it was applied for on-line, they confirmed this after I'd sent the 'account in dispute' letter....rendering the acccount not in dispute as they had complied with s78

 

At this point, they get the hump because you are (most likely) wrong and they think you are trying to not pay so they start getting the hump big time - make sense?

 

true to a point, I have paid 2 months of payments since, to stop the breach

 

That's my take on where your at from the limited knowledge of you I have from a few posts.

 

You dont say when you SAR'd them I dont think. Did you specify exactly what you wanted in the SAR? You need to write back and be explicit about exactly what information you want from them. Itemised statements from beginning to now showing ALL PPI payments, charges and interest as INDIVIDUAL transactions. Give the a further 7 days to comply, remind them you are legally entitled etc.

 

I sent the SAR letter from the CAG library, I didnt realise I had to add specifically add what information I required (you learn something new every day! :-))

Will do, they've still a week to comply

 

Yes, I believe you were mis-sold PPI so tick that off and vanquis have some ridiculous charges as well I think.

 

hope that helps

 

thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

In theory a SAR should get you every bit of data with your details on it in practice companies tend to 'interpret' what you want. Usually revolving around ease of access to data and perhaps not wanting to show you anything that might be wrong - at least in enough to detail for you to know/prove its wrong.

 

So, if you SAR a bank for example very often all you get is a pile of statements. Vanquis have sent you summary information of everything they have which one a certain level 'complies' with a SAR. So you have to be specific then if they dont stump up you send an LBA giving them a further 7 days.

 

In your case I would give them the full time limit again from your 'new' letter, just to keep it simple.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im going through same thing with vanquis they tried to say they do not have have to produce a signed agreement untill court??

I replied Dear Sirs,

 

With regard to the documents that you sent me in relation to my request for information under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, I am still waiting for the signed executed agreement. You seem to have sent me a somewhat recent copy of your terms and conditions and a very recent copy of an agreement form unsigned by anyone. I’m sure this must be an oversight, so I will ask you again for the proper documents.You also ask me to include documented evidence in future enquiry?? I am not sure what you mean by this and can only highlight you to the relevent law as below:

 

I draw your attention to section 61 of the consumer credit act 1974 (an excerpt enclosed for your perusal) in that

“(1) A regulated agreement is not properly executed unless a document in the prescribed form itself containing all the prescribed terms and conforming to regulations under section 60(1) is signed in the prescribed manner both by the debtor or hirer and by or on behalf of the creditor or owner.”

Be also advised that your statutory time period has elapsed and YOU are now in default and very shortly you will have committed a criminal offence. As you are now in default NO further action can be taken on this account until such a time as the original SIGNED EXECUTED documents are made available to me.

This account is still in dispute and I still forbid the passing of any data to third parties, if any data has been processed illegally since my last request I shall take appropriate action.

Further if you cannot supply the proper documents and you have entered any defaults against my name I require that you remove them immediately.

I shall be carefully considering my options and next actions.

I await your response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IF you really want all the documents then you need to SAR or send them a cpr pre litigation request, there's a sticky in the legal forum. They have to supply original copies in response to that.

 

sections 60/1 will not help you get it.

 

Pretty sure the cut of for signed agreements is April 2007 after the 2006 amendment came into force. Anything before that must have a signature.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just sent the above to vanquis after they claimed have fulfilled thier obligations by sending me a unsigned terms and conditions,

If my card is post 2007 am I on a looser?? I can still dispute the account on incorrect balance due to charges ,but at moment they say only have to produce signiture at court

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes but they seem to think signiture is required with them stating only needed in court, so call their bluff lol failing that il uphold the dispute and all the gains that applies to that ie OFT rules whilst I argue the incorrect balance

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes but they seem to think signiture is required with them stating only needed in court, so call their bluff lol failing that il uphold the dispute and all the gains that applies to that ie OFT rules whilst I argue the incorrect balance

For a CCA request under s77/78 they do not need to supply a signature, but it must be a true copy orf the agreement, that is a copy taken from the original document. If they have it, why not copy it and send it. Current terms and conditions are not adequate, however if they are saying to you that they have reconstructed the agreement as the original, but omitted signatures then that is OK, but go back to them with:

 

You assert that have supplied a true copy of my executed agreement in response to my requests under Section 78 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, insisting that the documents supplied are a True Copy of an agreement. This statement is binding on you, as per section 172 of the Act.

 

Section 172 states:

 

172 Statements by creditor or owner to be binding

 

(1) A statement by a creditor or owner is binding on him if given under-

section 77(1), section 78(1), section 79(1), section 97(1), section 107(1)©, section 108(1)©, or section 109(1)©.

 

This means that the documents that you have previously provided, are the only documents you may now rely on in any attempt at enforcing this alleged debt in the future.

As hungrybear has previously stated, they must supply a copy of the original agreement for an SAR or under CPR 31.16, prior to court action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

thread update...I recieved a letter from Vanquis today...It looks like a result..They've offered me a refund of £276 in their words "in order to bring this matter to a speedy and amicable resolution......sum represents the total amount of charges applied to your account"

 

I guess accepting this offer would mean I dont have the hassle of starting court preceedings...No interest on the charges has been offered, but hey, its a good feeling to see them finally cave in! :):)

Link to post
Share on other sites

thread update...I recieved a letter from Vanquis today...It looks like a result..They've offered me a refund of £276 in their words "in order to bring this matter to a speedy and amicable resolution......sum represents the total amount of charges applied to your account"

 

I guess accepting this offer would mean I dont have the hassle of starting court preceedings...No interest on the charges has been offered, but hey, its a good feeling to see them finally cave in! :):)

A result of sorts and if you are happy with it then that is all that matters. They should pay back the interest charged though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A result of sorts and if you are happy with it then that is all that matters. They should pay back the interest charged though.

aye, I havent accepted it yet though, I'm going to mull over it for a few days....although if Vanquis think I'm going to go away, they are sadly mistaken, because Round 2 is about to start, the PPI reclaim! :D

 

 

BTW, thanks Vint for your help and advice, its been very much appreciated!:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Blimey, Just got my latest statement from Vanquis and they've added another £24 in charges!!

 

Needless to say, I wont be accepting their offer...Is the next step N1 app in court?

 

No the next step should technically be this is what I want or I'll take you to court, you have 14 days; followed by an LBA address to a company officer - secretary / director giving a further 7 days THEN and N!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...