alanfromderby v Abbey - 2nd Claim - Judgement awarded

[alanfromderby]

It is a great feeling to be able to turn the tables.

 

I have just put in my request yesterday via e-banking, and am now awaiting their acknowledement. In hindsight though, I wish I had gone down the DPA route.

 

How long should we be giving them to send the statements ordered through e-banking before following up with a DPA request?

[BankFodder]

There is nothing to stop you sending a DPA request now. Send the money with it. Claim it back later

[joneshousehold]

Hey, greetings from fellow Derbian challenging the Abbey. Great staff at the local branch, shame about the manager and the rest of the remote customer service team!

 

Good luck with your quest. We actually already had our statements so could calculate the claim but I have tried asking for manual interventions anyway. No reply as yet but it has been only a couple of days.

 

It's always worth a try sending a request anyway. You could include a comment to the effect that you have applied on-line as well. The general view on the forum is that the DPA request is useful for the extra information you can try and get. When it is refused it is always good to have as something for the court if it should get that far.

 

Also it gives you an extra line of attack as you can report them to the Information Commissioner for a refusal.

[richardc]

And you should report them to IC if they don't comply with your request.

[alanfromderby]

Hi, and thanks for the advice.

 

I have had mixed responses from branch staff locally. The ones who have been there for some time are great and very friendly. However, I do find that their response to anything out of the ordinary is to direct you to the call-centre telephones.

 

The best one recently though, was when I wanted to present a cheque for Special Clearance. The account I have has a five-day clearance time for cheques, and I wanted to request faster clearance for one cheque - the value of the cheque was such that I was prepared to pay the fee.

 

Anyway, I was told that it could take longer than five days if I used that system, due to "delays with the post".

 

I asked why the cheque could not be put through the normal system - as it would, if it had been put through a standard current account.

 

The reply came that "Abbey is not a clearing bank".

 

I asked how then it was possible that Abbey's standard current account quoted a three day clearance.

 

She replied that my account had a five day clearance time.

 

"That's not the point", I said. "You have accounts that offer a three day clearance, so why can't you process my cheque in three days if I pay for Special Clearance?"

 

"Because Special Clearance relies on the post and it can take as much as ten days"

 

At this point I gave up.

 

On another occasion I wanted to bank about twenty cheques at the counter...only to be told that this was "most irregular", and I should use the ATM - of course that adds another day to the processing time!

 

In the end though, I think all banks are as bad as each other. The patronising and unhelpful chap on the Nationwide advert shows to me the real attitude of the banks, and other financial institutions, that we are trying to take on.

 

However, within these unfeeling corporations, you do find some staff who care...and as I said at the start of this post, there are several at our local branch who do try to be as helpful as they can.

 

BTW...do you think there is any posibility of getting my money back from a local Coca-Cola Championship Football Club, after years of under achievement?

 

[joneshousehold]

Hmm - are you a season ticket holder too! I'm afraid we have the excesses of Messrs Sleightholme and Keith to pay for so there is no chance of a recovery of your money.

[alanfromderby]

Can somebody please clarify about the 8%.

 

On the spreadsheet it says that you should not request (or even mention) the 8% interest until you start the CC claim.

 

Does this mean that the bank would only have to refund the actual fees taken should they decide to settle within the 14+14 days?

 

Am I interpretting this correctly?

[dave]

Yes you are.

[joneshousehold]

Yes you are.

 

But there will be interest on the charges if the account is overdrawn or interest not received if it is in credit. Would these not also be recoverable and is the 8% not a reasonable 'estimate' of these. I am basing this on the 4% many banks advertise as their 'in credit' interest rates and the 6 to 8% authorised overdraft rates and sometimes over 20% unauthorised overdraft interest rates.

I saw another posting somewhere (can't recall where) by Maxie I think, that suggested a nominal figure of £10 per £100 of claim can be included and this is fairly well in line with the 8% calculation. Whatever the calculation it is still a figure that can be justified however it is calculated.

Hope this sounds logical, I have had a very large glass of wine. I just hope I am not moved to apologise with embarrassment tomorrow morning!!!!!

[alanfromderby]

Received letter this morning saying that my e-banking request for 6-years worth of copy statements had been received, and that as they have been archived they would be sent out "shortly".

 

Interestingly the letter comes from a chap called Antony Tarbitt, who has acquired the title of "Business Manager - Customer Account Service Excellence". Hmmm!

 

Using a "belt and braces" approach, I have also been able to confirm through track-and-trace that Abbey have received my DPA letter and payment.

 

The clock has started.

[alanfromderby]

Interesting to note that a few days ago I received a letter from Abbey regarding an unpaid DD. Usually these letters say that £35 will be taken out on a date to be advised on your next statement. This one said that a fee would be deducted, and that the amount and date would be notified on the statement.

 

This was sent before they would have received my request for statements, so I guess they are having some serious thoughts of what to do next.

[richardc]

Interesting. Let us know what your statement says when you get it.

[alanfromderby]

Received the first batch of printouts this morning - so I know what I will be doing this afternoon.

 

They appear to go back to the beginning of 2005, but come with a covering letter from their DPA Office that confirms they have passed the request through to the archive department, and that I should receive the microfiched copies of the remaining documents "in due course".

 

The clock is still ticking.....

[alanfromderby]

Actually, just had another look at the letter, and they appear to pulling a fast one. Effectively, they have converted my DPA request into a request for copy statements. The argument they are using is the microfiche excuse, and that they don't keep manual intervention information centrally, so they cannot easily supply it.

 

It is my opinion that "in due course" tends to mean "sometime, never". Time to get them back on my timetable:

 

 

 

Jackie Scott

Data Protection Consultant

Regulatory Compliance

Abbey House

201 Grafton Gate East

Milton Keynes

MK9 1AN

7th April 2006

 

 

Data Protection Act disclosure request

 

Dear Ms Scott

 

Account Number: xxxxxxxx

I am in receipt of your letter dated 4th April 2006, outlining that you could only provide me with printouts covering the last 13 months on my account, because any earlier information has been archived onto microfiche. Enclosed was a list of transactions and account detail covering that 13 month period.

 

My request was for a complete list of transactions and charges relating to our account since 1st April 2000 – in short, a list of charges with dates and amounts – alternatively, a complete set of account statements for that period will be acceptable. This should be retrievable from your accounting systems, and easy for you to produce. I will accept a computer print out of these transactions.

 

I am aware that you have been willing and able to provide other customers with a print-out of six years transaction information – and am happy to provide evidence of this to the Information Commissioner should it prove necessary. I would also draw your attention to Smith v Lloyds TSB Bank plc (2005) EWHC 246 (Ch).

 

This letter has been sent by first class recorded delivery, and therefore should have reached you by Monday April 10th – as you will be aware, as of this date you have just 26 days in which to comply with my request. As stated above, a complete set of account statements for the period in question will be acceptable; however, I expect this to be provided within the time period for DPA compliance.

 

Should there be any further attempts to delay compliance, I will be left with no alternative but to escalate this matter into an official complaint to the Information Commissioner.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

[alanfromderby]

Day 41 - Abbey have now defaulted on the DPA request, and will have my Letter Before Action giving them 7 days to comply, or I will be commencing an action under section 7 of the Data Protection Act.

 

If they fail to get the information to me by Monday 15th May, I will be issuing the CC action, and hitting them with my Prelim for an estimated claim.

[joneshousehold]

Interesting, they have defaulted me too! Not sure what I'm going to do yet as I have just listed our claim with Moneyclaim. I will probably do the same as you - the more the merrier! I shall have to have a look at the procedure.

 

Good luck

 

I have also had a go at them about the threat to close the account and Dave seems keen for me to take it further which I will probably do. Have they done the same to you?

[alanfromderby]

The letter I sent is copied below - if you need the wording for the Particulars of Claim PM me at the time:

 

 

 

 

Jackie Scott

Data Protection Consultant

Regulatory Compliance

Abbey House

201 Grafton Gate East

Milton Keynes

MK9 1AN

 

 

6th May 2006

 

 

LETTER BEFORE ACTION

Section 7 – Data Protection Act 1998

 

Dear Ms Scott

 

Account Number: xxxxxxxx

I am in receipt of the documents that you have supplied in response to my Data Protection Act information request dated 23rd March 2006. The disclosure of personal data is incomplete in that at least the following documents are missing.

 

1) You have failed to provide a complete list of transactions and charges for the period prior to February 2005.

2) You have provided no notes, or documents relating to instances of manual intervention prior to February 2005.

This is not an exhaustive list by any means, it is just an example of some of the information I am missing.

 

Accordingly, I have to tell you that you have not yet complied with your obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

The time for compliance with my request has now expired. If you do not comply fully with my Subject Access Request within 7 days, I shall apply to the County Court for an order together with damages at the discretion of the court.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

[joneshousehold]

Thanks for that I will try and look at it tonight.

[alanfromderby]

It looks like Abbey have decided to play games with me now. I received the following letter this morning, which is in response to my Data Protection Act - Letter Before Action:

 

 

 

Dear xxxxxxxxxx

 

Thank you for your letter dated 8th May addressed to Jackie Scott.

 

I note your comments regarding transactions and charges prior to February 2005 and regarding notes or documents relating to manual intervention for the same period.

 

I confirm that you have been given all the transactional data you are entitled to under the Data Protection Act as you have been provided with all the transactional details that are held on our systems. As previously advised, any previous transactions have been archived onto microfiche. As these microfiche records are not held as part of a relevant filing system, they are not covered by the Data Protection Act and will not therefore be supplied to you under a Section 7 Data Protection Act request. However, I confirm that arrangements have been made for the microfiche records to be sent to you in due course.

 

As far as notes of records about manual intervention are concerned, I am sorry that we are unable to help with this request. As Jackie Scott mentioned in her letter, not all manual interventions are recorded and we do not keep a central record of this activity.

 

You have mentioned that the two items listed in your letter are examples of the information you are missing. It is not clear what other information you believe is missing, but if you could clarify this, I will investigate further.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Debbie Waghorn

Head of Data Protection

 

 

 

Sorry Abbey, but "in due course" is not god enough - looks like another trip to Derby County Court if it doesn't turn up by Monday!

 

A nice big estimated prelim can go in the post at the same time.

[Seminole]

I'm really looking forward to seeing how Abbey respond to the Section 7 action. They're either going to cave in or they're going to have to fight it out in court. There's no half way house here. They either have to give up or explain to a DJ how their systems aren't relevant for DPA purposes.

 

In the context of the OFT report I don't envy their chances of doing this. They are going to look extremely shifty and obstructive to any judge who has an even slightly open mind.

 

I'm hoping that you or I are going to open the floodgates for claims against this odious bank.

[joneshousehold]

Will the case be heard in open court? If it will, post the date and I will try and come along.

Cheers

[alanfromderby]

All Small Claim cases are held in public, that is why the banks are so reluctant to go to court and explain how their charges are calculated.

 

I very much doubt that they will want to go to court over this issue, as it could potentially do them great damage - more so than losing a claim over charges.

 

1) It would force the Information Commissioner to act against banks side-stepping the DPA regs..

2) It would cause the banks to have to produce many more documents than they would have had to if they had complied.

3) It would also put a great big spanner into the works of their stalling and obstruction tactics.

4) It may also have serious implications as far as the OFT are concerned.

 

Certainly if they are daft enough to want to argue about this in court I will let you know the date - you might have two visits to make as I filed against Bristol & West today!

[dave]

If Abbey really are that stupid (and frankly I wouldn't put anything past them when it comes to that arena), would you mind my attending the court as, at the very least, a spectator?

[joneshousehold]

Ooh, you're brave. We have filed against Abbey so far and have Nationwide and a few others lined up. I was only brave enough to file the one in case it involves a lot of work - I have an exam next month and I really shouldn't spend lots of time on CAG but it is so addictive!

 

Good luck

[joneshousehold]

Hey Dave we could have a whole mob at this rate!