Bakewell Vs Barclaycard

[bakewemr]

Just a quick one, hope I dont sound to stupid......

 

do I use the same subject access request form letter for Barclaycard that I have used for Barclays???

[Aitken Brotherston]

Just a quick one, hope I dont sound to stupid......

 

do I use the same subject access request form letter for Barclaycard that I have used for Barclays???

 

It is essentially the same letter but the identification information is for your credit card not the Bank account.

Barclaycard is pretty much a separate organisation to Barclay's bank.

[bakewemr]

Is it generally advised to send all correspondance via recorded delivery?????

[Aitken Brotherston]

Is it generally advised to send all correspondance via recorded delivery?????

 

Recorded delivery (signed for) is best as it removes any doubt that the letter was delivered and it is much less likely to get lost. The bank / credit card co may still dispute what was included but at least it is one fewer excuse for them to use.

[andyhargreaves]

Recorded delivery (signed for) is best as it removes any doubt that the letter was delivered and it is much less likely to get lost. The bank / credit card co may still dispute what was included but at least it is one fewer excuse for them to use.

 

I was advised by the Post Office that Recorded Delivery sent to a PO Box address does not require a signature (not sure why). So, to guarantee a signature, either use Special Delivery (£4) or a non-PO Box address.

 

Andy

[bakewemr]

Recieved a letter back from Barclaycard basically saying I cant have any statement befoe 2004 because its difficult for them to lay their hands on, can anyone advise me of my response?

 

Dear Mr Bakewell

 

Further to your request for personal data held by Barclaycard, please find enclosed a copy of the relevant information from May 2004.

Statements held prior to May 2004 are stored on microfiche. Statements are copied onto the microfiche in date order and more than one customer statement may be held on an individual film of microfiche. These statements are not stored by reference to account number of customer name and are not "readily accessible" within the meaning of the Data Protection Act. These statements are therefore not retained in a relevant filing system and therefore do not fall within the class of documents to be produced pursuant to a subject access request They can be obtained from our Customer Services Dept at a cost of £3 per statement.

 

Furthermore, we are unable to provide a computer print out of transactions on your account to date. Our computer systems do not permit us to print such historic data. Neither do our computer systems allow us to search for and identify individual charges applied to an account It is therefore not possible to provide you with a print out of such charges. I would also add that Barclaycard did not introduce default charges on its accounts until mid-2001. The statements that have been provided to you contain the information that we currently have recorded relating to charges on your account.

This information is complete in respect of the above account relationship with you at the time of extraction.

 

Should you have any further questions regarding this matter please do not hesitate to contact me. If my reply does not meet with your expectations you may ultimately be eligible to refer to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

If I have not heard from you within 8 weeks from the date of this letter, I will close my file in accordance with usual practice.

[Aitken Brotherston]

Half the world and his wife (well not quite perhaps) have received this letter.

They are relying on an interpretation of "readily accessible" in the Data Protection act.

 

From The Data Protection Act 1998

"relevant filing system" means any set of information relating to individuals to the extent that, although the information is not processed by means of equipment operating automatically in response to instructions given for that purpose, the set is structured, either by reference to individuals or by reference to criteria relating to individuals, in such a way that specific information relating to a particular individual is readily accessible.

 

Their interpretation is that the data is not "readily accessible" and so far as I know it has not yet been tested either by the Information commissioner or in court. They are trying to put you off and/or delay everything and they will try this at every stage.

 

Do not be deterred.

 

My view is that they are deliberately misinterpreting “readily accessible” to try to put obstacles in the way. If the information is sufficiently accessible to supply it to you at £3 per statement then it is readily accessible enough for the purposes of the Data Protection Act. This has not yet been tested in court but if large numbers of us complain then it will be taken more seriously.

 

If you wish to challenge them here is a suggested paragraph to include in your letter.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am perfectly satisfied that if the statements are readily accessible enough for you to offer them to me at a cost of £3 per statement then they are READILY ACCESSIBLE enough for the purposes of the Data Protection Act 1998. If the information requested in my letter of xx/xx/xxxx is not supplied by yy/yy/yyyy, being the statutory 40 days from the date of the request letter, I shall lodge a complaint against you with the Information Commissioner for breach of the provisions of the Data Protection Act.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

You may care to change the style to suit you own and remember to insert the date of the Data Protection Act Subject Access Letter (xx/xx/xxxx) and the "time up" date (yy/yy/yyyy).

[bakewemr]

People, need some assurances on the reply I am about to make to Barclaycard, feel free to use this letter if it is of use. Can anyone that has gone through the microfile babble bulls**t let me know if I am covering my bases with this letter below?????

 

Any help is much appreciated as always............

 

 

Dear Carl,

ACCOUNT NUMBER: **** **** **** ****

I am writing to you to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 05/09/2006 outlining that you could only provide me copy statements covering transactions from May 2004 on my account, because any earlier information has been archived onto microfiche. I also acknowledge receipt of the information you forwarded.

My request was for a complete list of transactions and charges relating to my account – in short, a list of charges with dates and amounts – alternatively, a complete set of account statements for that period would 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 would also like to draw your attention to the fact that if the statements are readily accessible enough for you to offer them to me at a cost of £3 per statement then they are READILY ACCESSIBLE enough for the purposes of the Data Protection Act 1998. If the information requested in my letter of 30/08/2006 is not supplied by 09/10/2006 being the statutory 40 days from the date of the request letter, I shall lodge a complaint against you with the Information Commissioner and the FSA for breach of the provisions of the Data Protection Act. I am aware that you have been willing and able to provide other customers with a print outs of transaction information covering this period and that any delay tactic will not be tolerated.

 

Also upon further investigation the Data Protection Act does not cover microfiche stored entries is not true, it has been taken out of context. This exemption only applies to medical, educational, and public records. Clearly bank charges are none of these.

 

Yours faithfully,

M.Bakewell

[Aitken Brotherston]

There is a fair amount of activity around this Microfiche issue. We shall see who blinks first.

 

Keep us posted on developments.

[lynzpower]

dont get too focused onthe microfuiche issue

 

read my thread further down the page and have a look at your fan fold print off

[bakewemr]

Passed to my solicitor, will take 30% of claim, and pull Barclaycards trousers down over the microfiche issue.

Can someone give me the links for reporting them to the Information Commissioner and the FSA for breach of the provisions of the Data Protection Act please.

I have seen them on here before but cant remember where.

Cheers.

[skbuncks]

Why O why are you giving away 30% of your claim???? Thats almost as big a rip off as the charges themselves.

If I can so this anyone can

[bakewemr]

Time is the biggest factor, simply cant be bothered banging my head against the wall with Barclaycard/Barclays/HSBC. Working 50 hours a week and trying to finish my masters, not a lot of room for anything else in my life at the moment.

 

He has just been successful with my sister-in-law for £1600. I have see some of his letters drafted on behalf of my sister in law and final draft case, he is very VERY good. No offence to the guys running this site but his letters make theirs look average at best.

 

Had the claim sorted and paid out within one month of statements being returned to him.

 

You get what you pay for.

[bakewemr]

Can someone give me the links for reporting them to the Information Commissioner and the FSA for breach of the provisions of the Data Protection Act please.

[skbuncks]

Any chance you could post a copy of his letters here???

Here is link to ICO office for complaints

Data Protection Complaints – Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO)

 

not sure bout FSA one

 

skb

[bakewemr]

will do as and when i get them.....cheers for the link.

[bakewemr]

Copy of letter my solicitor has sent to the Barclays:

The Manager

The bank has charged my aforementioned client numerous fees in respect of unpaid items and unauthorised borrowing since April 2001 amounting to £*** and £*** on account nos. ******** and ******** respectively. I have enclosed copies of the statements of account in which these charges appear for your information.

Having taken specific legal advice on the matter of such charges I would make the following points:

Whilst I accept that where a breach of contract has occurred, such as in this case, the bank is entitled to recover appropriate damages to compensate it for the actual loss incurred. The parties to a contract can agree, as is the case here, that if either party breaches the contract, a certain sum of money is to be paid to the other. If this sum is termed a genuine pre-estimate of the loss as a result of the breach of contract, then it stands as agreed damages and is called liquidated damages.

If the sum agreed however is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss, but a penalty, then it is not recoverable as a matter of law. The charges which the Bank has levied on my client clearly fall into this latter category in that they are excessive and therefore not a genuine pre-estimate of loss, but a penalty and therefore, not recoverable in law. If the bank considers these charges to be damages, then please would you provide an analysis which demonstrates that these charges actually do reflect the bank's costs.

There are also several cases in law which prove this argument, three of which I quote below:

Murray v Leisureplay (2004)

Dunlop Tyre Company v New Garage & Motor Co. (1915)

Bridge v Campbell Discount Co. Ltd (1962)

It is also the opinion of The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) that these charges are punitive in nature and furthermore, The 1977 Unfair Terms (contracts) Act requires that all contract terms be reasonable. I don't consider these charges to be reasonable as defined by this act.

As I am sure you are aware, the OFT has already instigated a cap on credit card penalty fees and further to this, announced on 7 September 2006 that it is now is to investigate overdraft charges and it is highly likely that there will be a similar outcome.

This statement from The OFT has far reaching legal implications for the banks who impose these charges and it is now clearer than ever that at the present levels, penalty charges have no legal validity and there can be no that this statement would further strengthen any challenge to recover these fees should one be brought before The Court.

Given the above, I should be obliged if you would arrange to refund the full amount of these fees, being £*** in total by 15 November 2006.

I sincerely hope that you will enter into dialogue with me in this matter and I have enclosed the appropriate form of authority to enable the bank to respond directly to me. Should you wish to discuss this matter with me, please feel free to telephone.

In the meantime, I should be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt.

Yours faithfully,

[skbuncks]

Thanks for that bakewell, IMHO its a better and more strongly worded letter. Only wish I hadnt sent my LBA yesterday then I could have used this one. Still think a lot of its strength will come from the fact thats its sent by a solicitor on solicitor headed paper etc and not a regular Joe Blogs. Would be interesting to see what response it illicits when a Joe Blogs like myself sends it in comparison to when its sent by a solicitor!! If you can keep us informed Bakewell of your solicitors progress it would be much appreciated..

 

Any volunteers out there from someone who's about to send off first prelim letter to try this one as a template???

 

SKB