All in the post - but help needed ?

[paulminize]

Hi all, thanks for the help and support that this web site has given so far.

I have sent a lot of requests for information off, and have recieved replies from one already.

 

The company is Citi cards - i cant find them anywhere on the forum, is/has anybody else dealt with them ?

 

My question is: they have sent me a form to fill in to request the information i have already requested in my SAR letter (Time wasting i guess) but they have asked me to give details of manual intervention i want disclosing ?

 

What exactly is this and what should i include ?

 

Thanks for any help.

 

Paul

[Glenn UK]

Paul

 

when you sent in your request for data did you send the SAR template and tenner?

 

Assuming you did then their 40 days starts when it was delivered unless they are not able to correctly identify you in which case i believe the 40 days starts from when you confrim your id to them in a satisfactory fashion.

 

You can fill in their form or not, depending on what you decide to do and what info they need, personally i would send them a letter back reinforcing that the SAR was served properly (if it was) and tell them how many days they have to comply.

 

Re the manual ntervention, its wierd that a bank or cc company should have to ask that. what you need to know is if there was any manual intervention involved when they added charges to your account and if so how much. in other words was it a simple compter based operation or did the bank provide a service where one of its staff sat and wrote you a nice letter.

 

I would wait and see if someone more knowledegable about such things comes back, personally id just write back supplying any confirmation of Id if thats required with a letter telling them they have x days remaining to comply.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

[paulminize]

Thanks for your response, if there are instances of manual intervention, which i know for a fact there are - can i still put in a cliam for those ? Or because its manuallly done is the fee okay ?

 

Thanks again

[Glenn UK]

LOL when you say you know that there was manual intervention i think you may be mistaken.

 

The banks are trying to justify their charges on the basis that it reflects their costs. If this is true then to show they are acting in good faith they need to tell you which charges have manual intervention involved.

 

that way when you get to court, if indeed you do, they dont have to say to the judge the claim is inflated because these specific charges involved expenditure of time and effort on the part of our staff, therefore the charges are in fact a true reflection of our costs.

 

Funny thing is that most banks have categorically denied they record such events so if they cant tell you when their charges involved manual intervention how can they know if they are lawful and reflect their costs?

 

So perhaps you should rethink your definition of manual intervention, thats why we ask the banks up front to aviod claiming for something we are not entitled to.

 

HTH

 

Glenn

[paulminize]

I see I see, sounds good ! So i never have spoken to anyone about charges, or had any manually refunded. I get it - if they don't know then i'm not telling.

 

Paul

[Glenn UK]

Paul

 

funny thing is its not quite like that as far as i know, its not that you havent spoken to anyone or anything, for all i know they may ring people up when they tell them theyre going to charge you.

 

The whole point is their argument doesnt work because they say they dont record the time and effort putinto allocating charges and penaties to yuor account.

 

Simple as that, if we ask and they cant provide the evidence when it gets to court it stifles this as a defence to a degree.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn