Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thousands more passengers could face delays or cancellations after an arson attack on France's train network on Friday.View the full article
    • you never use or give an email  2nd class stamp with free proof of posting from any po counter dx
    • Much appreciated for the ammendment. The snottier the better right!   What I am assuming is that this response is to be posted to Gladstones? However, I am seeing some users sending this as an email instead, which is a little confusing.  If we're happy with this response, what would you suggest is the best way to send it over to them (post/email), and is there anything additional I could include (if necessary)?  Thanks again! 
    • Hi I've read through other threads to better inform me of the process from here onwards. When I put in the MoneyClaim it gave me a claim number and it currently says to wait for the defendant to respond, they have until 7 August.   It seems their most likely action is to extend that a further 14 days to about 21 August - this hasn't happened yet, of course, as it is only 27 July but I'm anticipating that may be the case. when the expected defence action is taken by EVRi I will need to submit DQ with these responses A1 - no mediation B - my contact details C1 - yes to the small claims track D1 - No.  If No please state why.  I believe the defence will provide some rebuttal to the particulars of claim and so I need to include details as to why the claim requires a hearing.  Is there some certain templated text I can include here or will it vary depending on what the defendant comes back with? I see on the form it mentions the following: Relevant reasons include that there are factual disputes which will need the judge to hear from witnesses directly or the issues are so complex they need to be argued orally.  Hoping to reach out to see what may be the most effective statements for D1 reasoning. E1-5 are pretty straightforward. I want to get ahead of things and be ready to take the next step so I appreciate what advice you may have about the DQ.   Thanks!  
    • Rachel Reeves is set to reveal a public finances shortfall of billions on pounds after a snap audit.View the full article
  • 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
      • 162 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

Prospero v Barclaycard


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6507 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

Sent DPA request off 10 days ago. Just got back copy statements from May 2004 together with a letter containing the usual BS about earlier information being stored on microfiche.

 

Not sure what to do about this. I actually already have all the relevant statements from before May 2004, and was just missing a wodge from around the time I moved office last year, which they have now sent. So, it doesn't really bother me and I shall be starting the procedure now, but I'm just wondering if it's worth taking them to task over the DPA non-compliance anyway.

 

Anybody got any thoughts???

RBS Current Accounts £3868 claimed, settled in full before court

BoS Visa Card £350.58 claimed, settled in full before court action

Capital One Visa £1356.79 claimed, court claim issued, agreed to settle for £1127.46

 

HFC Bank Marbles £408.85 claimed, promised to settle before court, still waiting for cheque

Barclaycard £552.66 claimed, offered £152, AQ filed

Lloyds TSB MoreThan card £312.70 claimed, AQ filed

MBNA Visa £2744.22 claimed, £1250.51 paid, AQ filed

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Prospero

 

BCard are very reluctant to dish out data pre may 2004, no matter what you threaten them with. Still it doesnt hurt to complain. Here is a letter you can send bcard. You can also complain to the information commisioner - who knows if enough people complain they might do something about it (complain to the ICo here Data Protection Complaints – Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO))

 

good luck with ur claim. skb

 

Letter to bcard.

Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

 

I am in receipt of your letter dated XX/XX/XX, 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.

 

As you will be aware you need to have a 'relevant filing system' this

is a system in which files are structured or referenced so as to clearly

indicate at the outset of the search whether specific information

capable of amounting to personal data of an individual making a

subject access request is held within the system and, if so, in

which file or files it is held and which has, as part of its own

structure or referencing mechanism, a sufficiently sophisticated and

detailed means of readily indicating whether and where in an individual

file or files specific criteria or information about the applicant can be

readily located.

 

I am aware that you have been willing and able to provide other

customers with a print-out of transaction information covering this

period – and am ready to bring this to the attention of 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 XX/XX/XX – as you will be aware,

as of this date you have just XX 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 Data Protection Act compliance.

Should there be any further attempts to delay compliance, I will be

left with no alternative but to commence a County Court action under

section 7, and section 15(2) of the Data Protection Act 1998, and in

due course, escalate this matter into an official complaint to the

Information Commissioner and the FSA.

 

Yours faithfully,

Victory over Lloyds £890

Click!

Victory over Vodafone: default removal

click!

Victory over Lloyds PPI claim £2606 click!

Barclaycard lazygoing - £580 + £398 contractual int at 17.7 % click! (Received partial payment £110 21/11/06)

The GF's battle against RBS click! stayed awaiting the end of the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks - I was thinking along those lines. As I said, it doesn't make much difference to me as I have nearly every relevant statement, but I don't see why that means they should get away with flouting the law.

RBS Current Accounts £3868 claimed, settled in full before court

BoS Visa Card £350.58 claimed, settled in full before court action

Capital One Visa £1356.79 claimed, court claim issued, agreed to settle for £1127.46

 

HFC Bank Marbles £408.85 claimed, promised to settle before court, still waiting for cheque

Barclaycard £552.66 claimed, offered £152, AQ filed

Lloyds TSB MoreThan card £312.70 claimed, AQ filed

MBNA Visa £2744.22 claimed, £1250.51 paid, AQ filed

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...