Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've not seen it personally but I think that's the letter Dad has had from Overdales. I'll see it tomorrow. It states balance: zero
    • Agreed as you clearly have little faith in your star runners, mind you - I have less - conditional on the welcher clause I defined being part, and that we are talking about the three defined candidates: Tice Farage and Anderson - not anyone anywhere as reform might (outside chance) get someone decent to run somewhere. If any of the three dont run - they count as a loss.   welcher clause. "If either of us loses and doesn't pay - we agree the site admin will change the welchers avatar permanently to a cows ass - specific cows ass avatar chosen by the winner - with veto by site on any too offensive - requiring another to be chosen  (or of course, DP likely allows you can delete your account and all your worthless posts to cheapskate chicken out and we'll just laugh) "
    • This is the full details, note they have made an error (1) in that paragraph 5 stated 14 days before hearing not 7. Surely a company of their size would proof read and shouldn't make basic errors like that 1) The Claimant respectfully applies for an extension of time to comply with paragraph 5 of the Order of Deputy District Judge XXX dated XX March 2024 i.e. the evidence upon which the parties intend to rely shall be filed and served not later than 7-days before the hearing. 2) The Claimant seeks a short extension of time allow them to further and properly investigate data provided to them by Royal Mail which is of importance to the proceedings and determination of the Claim. 3) The Claimant and Royal Mail have an information sharing agreement. Under the agreement, Royal Mail has provided data to the Claimant in respect of the matters forming the basis of these proceedings. The Claimant requires more time to consider this data and reconcile it against their own records. The Claimant may need to seek clarification and assurances from Royal Mail before they can be confident the data is correct and relevant to the proceedings i.e. available to be submitted as evidence. 4) The Claimant's witness is currently out of the office on annual leave and this was not relayed to DWF Law until after the event which has caused a further unfortunate delay. 5) The Court has directed parties to file and serve any evidence upon which they intend to rely not later than 14- days before the hearing i.e. by 4pm on 6 June 2024. Regrettably, the Claimant will have insufficient time to finalise their witness evidence and supporting exhibits as directed. We therefore respectfully apply to extend the time for filing/serving evidence so that the evidence upon which the parties intend to rely by filed and served not later than 7-days before the hearing i.e. by 4pm on 13 June 2024. 6) This application is a pre-emptive one for an extension of time made prior to the expiry of the deadline. In considering the application, the Court is required to exercise its broad case management powers and consider the overriding objective. 7) In circumstances where applications are made in time, the Court should be reticent to refuse reasonable applications for extensions of time which neither imperil hearing dates nor disrupt proceedings, pursuant to Hallam Estates v Baker [2014] EWCA Civ 661. 😎 It is respectfully submitted that the application is made pursuant to the provisions of CPR 3.1(2)(a) and in accordance with the overriding objective to ensure the parties are on an equal footing when presenting their cases to the Court. The requested extension of time does not put the hearing at risk and granting the Application will not be disruptive to the proceedings.   They have asked for extension Because 2) The Claimant requires additional time to consider and reconcile data received from Royal Mail which is relevant to these proceedings against their own data and records in order to submit detailed evidence in support of this Claim.
    • i was merely pointing out if the OP did put in an N244 it required a bundle. as for what they need to do now.... it might be an idea to post a link to your thread then the OP can read it and understand where your guidance is coming from and the ongoing process he will have to follow... dx
    • The notes entered into circulation yesterday and are proving popular with collectors, who will be hoping to snap up examples with low serial numbers.View the full article
  • 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

prushton vs Abbey


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6266 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

Hi , I am new to this forum. i am at the court stage with the Halifax and thought i might take on the Abbey with regards to an old closed account ( closed in 2002) can anyone tell me the address to send my initial request for repayment to ?.

 

To everyone in the forum Hello and good luck !!!!!!! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi , thnxs for that :-) did you get a response ? probably standard letter right ?:x

 

Too right, thats all I ever got. Abbey are extreeeeemely good at being difficult and awkward right down to the wire so be prepared to dig your heels in. They arent a push over but if you follow the step by step guide you will be fine and you will get your money back ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

having read through this forum i was beginning to see that it was going to be an uphill struggle , but the law is on our side , the Abbey do seem to be using some inventive processes to avoid complainace to data requests .:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi to everyone in the Abbey forum. I have sent my data access request to the Abbey on the 14th August , standard 40 days to comply . I am trying to claim on an account closed in 2002 and i am aware of the Abbey saying that their microfiche systems are not covered under the data protection act ( another stalling tactic) .Has anyone got an update as to how to deal with the Abbey regarding the microfiche argument?:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

See the top of the Abbey forum (Sticky) and this is well covered:)

DONT FORGET TO DONATE TO THIS SITE WHEN YOU WIN THANKYOU

If you dont it wont be here:x

 

Let battle commence!!!!!:mad:

All advice and opinions given by people on this site are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, please seek qualified professional legal Help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am aware the Abbey are treating my request for statements under the DPA as a standard request for statements, ( Had telephone conversation with Jackie Scott Data protection team at Milton Keynes) I have now sent Data protection act disclosure template letter request to Pam Speed ( Abbey Bradford ) spelling out exactly what it was i required and that they have until 23rd September to send me my statements or i will commence a County Court action under section 7, and section 15(2) of the Data Protection Act 1998.:) anyone got any ideas how to proceed from here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Prushton

 

Did you receive any information from them? If not, you have to put a claim in through your local court, N1 form for Non-Compliance. From other threads, people have been receiving their info just before the court hearing, when taking this route. The only thing is, the £30 court fee is lost money unless you want to take them to court to reclaim it, which a few people have done.

 

If you have received only part of the info, then you can send a Prelim letter with a schedule of estimated charges, asking for a refund. You can work your estimate from the info you do have by taking an average from them, and using that figure for all the months you are missing.

 

Phil:)

This is only my personal, honest opinion!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, no I didnt recieve any statements just the usual microfiche letter and a form to fill in. I sent them another letter stating exactly what I require and told them they have a further 26 days of the 40 days under DPA to comply or I will take court action to force compliance :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The best advice is to check out oddfellows thread, he sued abbey for the same thing ie non compliance under sec 7 dpa i believe.

 

You need to ask for an order instructing them to comply and the value is a fiver or something equally small. The charge will then be £30 i believe.

 

Check out oddfellows thread for some guidance.

 

HTH

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi , on the eve of the 40 day limit under the Data protection act I have received 13 mths of statements from the Abbey, I am not sure if they intend to supply the rest I requested under my Data Protection Act but i intend to force compliance through the courts to get the full 6 yrs. My question is this, if they dont, how do I submit an estimated cliam? The charges for the 13mths are £592.97 do I just times this by six ? I would appreciate any help on this . thanks :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

thxs for your reply . so do i set it out something like this?

 

Estimated charges for 2000 - 2001 = £547.36

 

Estimated charges for 2001 - 2002 = £547.36

 

Estimated charges for 2002 - 2003 = £547.36

 

Estimated charges for 2003 - 2004 = £547.36

 

Estimated charges for 2004 - 2005 = £501.74

 

Charges as notified 2005 - 2006 ( list all charges) =£592.97

 

Total claimed £3,284.15

 

thanks for your help :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

On Sat 23rd Spetember I received 13 mths of statements from the Abbey. They arrived right on the 40 day deadline but obviously i am still short of the full 6yrs. I sent a Letter Before Action to them on Sat 23rd September giving them the 7 days notice, after which i will complete the N1 form and take it to the courts. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi , I sent my Data protection act subject access request on 14 th August , the 40 day deadline has passed ( 23rd September) On this date i received 13mths of statements .As the Abbey was in breach I have sent a Letter before action which they should have recieved on 25th September giving them 7 days to comply. I have telephoned the Abbey customer complaints line to lodge a complaint and i have been told that as the account was closed in 2002 that they only hold the records for 6 yrs. I then asked them how they were able to produce the 13 mths of statements if as they said they only keep records for 6 yrs.They said that that was all the information they held. I believe this was just a fob off , i would appreciate any help on this thanks. :-) I wonder if I could send a request for payment of estimated charges as my charges for the 13mths period were £592.27 and so do i set it out something like this?

 

£592.27 divided by 13 then times 12 for annual figure = £547.36

 

Estimated charges for 2000 - 2001 = £547.36

 

Estimated charges for 2001 - 2002 = £547.36

 

Estimated charges for 2002 - 2003 = £547.36

 

Estimated charges for 2003 - 2004 = £547.36

 

Estimated charges for 2004 - 2005 = £501.74

 

Charges as notified 2005 - 2006 ( list all charges) =£592.97

 

Total claimed £3,284.15

 

I would appreciate any help on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like you doing fine prushton and enjoy the ride:)

DONT FORGET TO DONATE TO THIS SITE WHEN YOU WIN THANKYOU

If you dont it wont be here:x

 

Let battle commence!!!!!:mad:

All advice and opinions given by people on this site are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, please seek qualified professional legal Help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Filed my N1 claim form today to force Abbey to comply with my DPA at Plymouth county court (I had to work hard to persuade the guy behind the counter that it was on the correct form) he kept telling me is wasnt and wanted to charge me £65 :o ) eventually he gave in and took the N1 telling me to ring tues 3rd October to see if it went through. Hopefully now the Abbey will understand I aint going away:) .

 

I wonder if someone could help me with calculating the interest on my estimated charges, as I havent a clue how to go about it. I would appreciate some help please :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi thanks for your help , i sent an estimated schedule of charges but didnt manage to sort out the estimated interest, i figured it probably wouldnt be that much anyway. As long as they pay me my charges total £3605.03 then i would be happy.

 

I wonder if you could take a look at this for me. its from the statute of limitations act 1980 (chapter 50 ) scroll down to pages 438 and 439 and find section 32 its entitled postponement of limitation period in case of fraud, concealment or mistake.

 

it can be found at the following link : http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/docs/cp151apa.pdf

 

I believe that this could be used to remove any limitation period that is applicable to our situation and allow for bank charges to be claimed further than the six year period. What do you think ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Received notification from Plymouth court today, informing me papers deemed served on 05/10/06 for non- compliance to Data Protection Act. They have until 19th October to reply to court. I figured as i have already submitted an estimated schedule of charges, that by the time they actually supply my statements as per my DPA request i should be in a position to apply to money claim online and submit a revised figure based on the statements they are forced to supply. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have today decided that i will send the following letter to Pam Speed at the Abbey in Bradford to let her know that i have not given up on the idea of receiving the bank statements requested under my Data Protection Act request of 14th August. I would welcome any thoughts.:)

 

 

We are writing to inform you that we are extending the scope of the above Data Protection Act Subject Access request to include a complete list of transactions and charges for the entire period relating to our banking history with your organization i.e. From the day it was opened in 1988 to the day it was closed on the 23rd January 2002.

You no doubt are aware, being the recipient of our Data Protection Act Subject Access Request dated 14th August 2006 and subsequent Letter before Action dated 23rd September 2006 that you have, to date failed to comply with our request and supply the full details we require.

We wish to inform you that we have, as we stated it was our intention to do so in our Letter before Action dated 23rd September served court papers on the registered head office address of the Abbey Plc in London to force compliance to our Data Protection Act Subject Access Request dated 14th August 2006. These papers were deemed served on the 5th October 2006. A previous Action of exactly the same nature brought against the Abbey for non-compliance to a Data Access Request resulted in the courts finding against the Abbey and a compliance order was issued, for your reference the claim no was:

Claim No: 6LO00969

Lowestoft County Courtand the Claim was to require compliance with a Subject Access Request under Section 7 of the Data Protection Act.

We shall of course, when the courts issue a compliance order against the Abbey in our case, furnish you with a copy so you may then act upon it and send us the information as requested above. Alternatively you may wish to send the information requested before the courts force compliance in which case we would be pleased to receive it. We look forward to hearing from you soon. Perhaps in your response you would be so kind as to include your direct telephone number

 

Yours faithfully

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...