Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • no its friday 21st by 4pm if you'd done it properly and read the sticky in post 2 it clearly says: ^^^^^ NOTE : WHEN CALCULATING THE TIMELINE - PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THE DATE ON THE CLAIMFORM IS ONE IN THE COUNT [example: Issue date 01.03.2014 + 19 days (5 days for service + 14 days to acknowledge) = 19.03.2014 + 14 days to submit defence = 02.04.2014] = 33 days in total Date of issue XX + 19 days ( 5 day for service + 14 days to acknowledge) = XX + 14 days to submit defence = XX (33 days in total)  if your defence filing date falls on a W/End, you must file by friday @4PM  
    • Have had a read up just to double check last day to file defence is 24 June (claim form date is 22 May)
    • Hi,  Price is mentioned above £14899.00, and no i did not buy the extra warranty.  dealership is 70 miles from my house.  I did get a report and diagnostic from Stephen James BMW and have sent that to big motoring world
    • The banana giant made payments to the AUC, which engaged in widespread human rights abuses for decades.View the full article
    • Firstly, don't trust this company. If you look at the Facebook groups relating to them you will find that your story is very similar to hundreds of others. You haven't told us about the price that you paid and whether or not you bought a warranty. We would like to know details also of the car, mileage, model, year, and even the registration number. Did the car come with an MOT? What date was given and who gave it the MOT? How far away from the dealership do you live? If you want to do anything about this you will need to get an independent inspection – preferably from an authorised BMW dealer somewhere. Do it as quickly as possible. Also it may be a good idea to put it in for an MOT although you've had it for six months so it may be a bit late. Read our used car guide
  • 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

Refusal to Provide Statements Under Data Protection Act


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6270 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

I am in the same position as many others with Abbey in that they provided one years statements (but made a point of saying that they weren't supplied under the Data Protection Act). I then sent the standard template letter pointing out the relevant section of the act, etc but again recieved the response that Microfiche records are not covered by the Data Protection Act and that my £10 would be put towards the first installment of these.

 

I have phoned and told them not to do this and pointed out their obligations under the DPA. The person I spoke to stated that Abbey do not believe Microfiche records are covered under the act. I said that it didn't really matter what they or I thought, it was the law itself what mattered. I then made sure that the £10 was not to be put towards obtaining these records outside of the act and there ensured a few minutes of pretend bemusement from the person I spoke to regarding what I did want the £10 put towards.

 

What is the recommended step now??

 

DC

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Dercos, on the step by step instructions below my signature there is a whole host of letters to send it also gives you a step by step guide on how to proceed, good luck reading and welcome, if you have any other questions, there is always someone around to help and please post in the same thread to keep it all tidy, if you pm a moderator they will change your thread title to Dercross v Abbey or something along those lines

 

best regards

  • Confused 1

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the help. I have written to them again stating that I only want the £10 fee to be used for the purposes of the DPA and that they now have only 16 days left to comply with the 40 day time limit. I have also included a copy of my previous request (based on the suggested template..

 

dc

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the same positition too, just received my letter back in recepit of my data protection letter and now am sending back the Protection Disclosure Act as I haven't received all of the statement because of the Mircofische thing. Sending the Disclosure Act of today Recorded delievery, which leaves Abbey 22 days to get all back to me from them receiving my last letter. Will keep you posted on my progress.

 

With Regards,

 

Zena

Clare:)

 

1. Abbey National Requested Statements 04/Aug/2006

2. Abbey National One years statements received 16/Aug/2006

3. Pam Speed Replied with Data Protection letter fob off-15/Aug/2006 -all archived onto microfiche, which is not covered under Data Protection Act. So I must pay 10.00 per month for copies of statements past 40 day period.

4. Apology letter received 26/Sep/2006 Grant Allman Mircofiche records not held under filing system, not covered by Data Protection Act, so therefore will not be provided to me under the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request). Fee is £10 per account per month

5. Letter -current investigating under way and will be back in contact in 4 weeks, letter received 27/Sep/2006

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I`m waiting for a response to my letter requesting the last 6 years statements. I`ve had the standard one from them about microfiche not being covered by DPA but during the 40 days time limit I`ve had a baby so my time table has gone abit off track! I`ve written pointing out that the 40 days are up but have said that I will give them a further 7 days to comply before I make a complaint to the Data Commisoner, which is up on Friday. Have I done the right thing and has anyone actually made a complaint, how do I go about this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks alot for you help and advice I have sent this off to them requesting two accounts worth of statements. Not sure If I was meant to send individual letters for two accounts or not? so i put two acounts numbers on the Disclosure Act Letter.

 

Kind Regards,

 

Zena

Clare:)

 

1. Abbey National Requested Statements 04/Aug/2006

2. Abbey National One years statements received 16/Aug/2006

3. Pam Speed Replied with Data Protection letter fob off-15/Aug/2006 -all archived onto microfiche, which is not covered under Data Protection Act. So I must pay 10.00 per month for copies of statements past 40 day period.

4. Apology letter received 26/Sep/2006 Grant Allman Mircofiche records not held under filing system, not covered by Data Protection Act, so therefore will not be provided to me under the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request). Fee is £10 per account per month

5. Letter -current investigating under way and will be back in contact in 4 weeks, letter received 27/Sep/2006

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have now had a third letter refusing to provide info under the Data Protection Act citing the usual microfiche arguement. I have replied that Abbey now have 14 days to comply or I will file a complaint with the commissioner for non compliance. Is this the correct procedure?

 

Also, how do I contact the moderators of the forum to change the title of this thread?

 

dc

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you log in replying to a thread ro creating a new one- you should be able to change the title of the thread?:p

Clare:)

 

1. Abbey National Requested Statements 04/Aug/2006

2. Abbey National One years statements received 16/Aug/2006

3. Pam Speed Replied with Data Protection letter fob off-15/Aug/2006 -all archived onto microfiche, which is not covered under Data Protection Act. So I must pay 10.00 per month for copies of statements past 40 day period.

4. Apology letter received 26/Sep/2006 Grant Allman Mircofiche records not held under filing system, not covered by Data Protection Act, so therefore will not be provided to me under the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request). Fee is £10 per account per month

5. Letter -current investigating under way and will be back in contact in 4 weeks, letter received 27/Sep/2006

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent the template reply to the microfiche response. they were quick to respond. just the wrong department. I received a letter from the COMPLAINTS department at ABBEY who basically said they would investigate my complaint, a new twist maybe, i didnt send a complaint as such just the standard reply to the microfiche response lol.

has anyone else had such a letter?

I now need to send the letters off to the commissioner because they have failed to supply statements within the time frame.

would someone please send the link for this? thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I've done changed the title..

 

I have now located about 2 years worth of statements. I assume I can go ahead with the next stage without compromising being able to proceed for the other 4 years when Abbey are made to provide them under the DPA?

 

DC

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anybody got a link to a simple to use calculator. I've tried the simple and advanced ones mentioned on this site but the former is full of data and the latter seems far too fussy.. Are there any others that work "straight out of the box"??

 

dc

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent the template reply to the microfiche response. they were quick to respond. just the wrong department. I received a letter from the COMPLAINTS department at ABBEY who basically said they would investigate my complaint, a new twist maybe, i didnt send a complaint as such just the standard reply to the microfiche response lol.

has anyone else had such a letter?

I now need to send the letters off to the commissioner because they have failed to supply statements within the time frame.

would someone please send the link for this? thanks

 

If you visit Information Commissioners Office at i c o.gov.uk (remove the spaces, I added them to get around a problem posting links) you will find a form you can download and complete to register an official complaint with the Information Commissioners Office.

 

Abbey are due a visit from them already on 12 September so it will add fuel to the fire.

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oops, posted the last thread to the wrong site... Ignore it..

 

I have just recieved the last 12 months statements from abbey AGAIN... God knows why they've done that.. They only have a week until the 40 days is up to provide the statements I requested but it doesn't look like they have any intention of complying with the DPA. It seems they are determined to stick to their interpretation of the act regarding the Microfiche argument..

 

I've got about 2 years worth of statements already. I shall start an action with those and continue to pursue Abbey for the rest..

 

dc

Link to post
Share on other sites

just in case you guys havnt seen it, there is information in another thread on this site telling us that abbey are getting a visit from the IOC this month. we should all be very happy about this and maybe they will knock some sense into them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just had the same letter about me making an official complaint through Abbey (mentioned a few posts ago). I have written back saying that I have made no such complaint. I reiterated that there are only a few days to go for them to provide the statements I requested under the DPA and that after that I shall be contacting the Commissioner regarding Abbey's non compliance after the 40 day time limit.

 

Is this some new stalling tactic by Abbey??

 

dc

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...