Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Should this to be take into court with him or should he send something in earlier?
    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
  • 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 
        • 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

Barclaycard SAR


anney63
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3589 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

ok explains things nicely.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 104
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Well defies belief what I received todat . This was my response requesting breakdown

Re; Your letter dated 19th November 2012

 

This is the what I sent requesting any further data and Breakdown. Today

You failed to respond fully with my Subject Access Request dated 23rd April 2012 while you clearly had data available back as far as 2001. Should you be withholding any other data which you have not disclosed then please send by return.

Accordingly I require a full list of all PPI data or copy statement’s, as well as a DETAILED breakdown as to how you arrived at both PPI refund offers, as previously requested.

Please be kind enough to send these by return

 

Today I received This: [ATTACH=CONFIG]39856[/ATTACH]

Subject access request was sent 23rd April. I requested any further data they had as they had suddenly found statements for 2001. now they want more money !!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Anney,

 

Letter could be sent by Recorded Del'y as follows to the address to which you sent the SAR Non-Compliance letter:-

 

Dear sir or madam,

 

FORMAL COMPLAINT - Account no: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

 

Your were sent a Subject Access Request on 23rd April 2012. This obliged you to provide me with information or data held by Barclays Bank plc about me.

 

I sent you a further letter asking for data which you clearly hold but have failed to disclose as required.

 

Copies of these letters are enclosed for reference.

 

I have now received a ridiculous letter from you (again, copy enclosed) saying you cannot comply with my request as the £10 fee was not enclosed.

 

I paid the necessary fee back in April and you have no right to request any further fee from me in this matter.

 

I require from you within 7 days :-

 

1. All account data regarding my account that you have not previously sent to me, particularly data or statements for the period [use the date from which you HAVE data] and earlier.

 

2. A detailed breakdown of how you arrived at the proposed PPI refund figure.

 

If you fail to respond as required, I will make formal complaints about your failures to your own Head Office, the ICO and the FOS.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

See what comes back............... :-)

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks slick will do. The letter comes from Leicester but the envelope had a label on the back as follws : Data Protection Team

Barclays Bank PLC

Radbroke Hall

Knutsford

Cheshire

Wa16 9EU Should i use this address or the Leicester one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Anney,

 

I'd use the Knutsford address.

 

:-)

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

40 days yet?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No

 

but this was originally SAR in April

Barclaycard keep finding more bits and pieces as I question thier PPI offer .

 

I phone just to make sure they have received everything and was told that the claim where I have requested the breakdown 3 times

has now been sent to the Sar Chamber on 18th December

who, I was advised

are the top people dealing with PPI issues and as yet nothing from the Knutsford Address re SAR for any other paperwork they are witholding.

 

This whole claim has been a nightmare .

 

Barclaycard just are not playing ball.

 

I note that others are not getting the detailed breakdown and are just getting fobbed off.

 

Never Give Up !!!!:roll:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Anney,

 

If they are messing you around by not supply data required by your SAR (and this could include details of the PPI refund offered), then you could consider court action to force Barclays to comply with your SAR.

 

They will usually supply any data which you need in response to such court action and also pay nominal damages which you claim for their failure to comply with the SAR when they should have done.

 

See the following links :-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?593-Data-Protection-Act-Non-Compliance-Template-Letters

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?571-Data-Protection-Act-Non-Compliance-Particulars-of-Claim.

 

Alternatively, you could complain to Barclays HQ and/or the FOS but both these options are likely to be slow and fruitless.

 

:-)

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Found a phone number for Executive Office so thought I would call on the Off Chance that they had something to do with Star Chamber. Got really helpful person who is following this up and calling me when she has some news. Maybe action at last but in the queue with FOS if not !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a call from Executive Office at B/Card. Will not change thier stance on calculations for average and the use of 4 0 balance statements . Say if we can send them a statement prior to 2001 they will revisit. I have sent all to FOS can anybody tell me if they will look at the way this average has been calculated and look at it differently. 4 months with zero balance in 2001 surely cannot cover 1992 to end 2000. Any comments would be appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

just noticed a thread where someone got thier data back to 1998 . Do you think its worth trying c/court. I've got as far back as 2001 which they sent when I insisted they check the redress, Funny how they found them 3 months after they made thier offer ???

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Anney,

 

You have to try and judge when you have got the best offer you're likely to get with the least amount of hassle. Involving the FOS is likely to take a long time with no guarantee that they'll get you any better result. The FOS will not get you any older data.

 

If you already have info back to 2001, even with court action you are unlikely to force disclosure of older data.

 

If you have no older statements to give to BC, then, IMHO you need to give serious consideration to accepting their offer.

 

Although I can see merit in arguing that you would have made purchases during the early period of the a/c, you need evidence to support your contentions. Without it, you may be banging your head against the proverbial brick wall.

 

Have you had a response to your SAR letter yet ?

 

:-)

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes they have sent paperwork back to 2001. I am going to check everything in hand in case there is something I have missed will make them revisit as they have stated they will do. I just feel that thier finding documents and sending them back to 2001 3 months after the offer was made appears rather odd when they did not send it with SAR . I will keep searching just one piece of paperwork will do it. Musnt give up . They still have not sent the brakdown after chasing numerous times. Thanks for help

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mustn't give up.

 

Of course you mustn't if there's a chance you'll find some older data .........

 

...... but you should also know when to accept what's offered if it's probably the bets you'll get.

 

:-)

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's probably just coincidence, but my average calculation was also worked out using just 4 months of data that Barclaycard had previously insisted didn't exist. I'm waiting for them to send me these statements before deciding what to do next - has anyone reported Barclaycard to the Information Commissioner for withholding data?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been looking at print outs they sent found a few interesting notes. The new card wasissued in April 2001 I didnt think they changed them without some sort of history. There is also a line which states last authorisation 7/02/1997 does that mean it was used on that date if so that proves it was used prior to 2001 which is what I need to prove loads more to go through

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there - just a quick query, I'm in a similar boat in that B/C have agreed that they have missold and will be making an offer. My SAR produced statements to nov 2006 and the PPI was levied from 1989 to 2007. Obviously I don't have any of those statements so just wondering what offer I'll get. I've read on here somewhere that where no statements available that B/C run a decreasing amount backwards to zero so from 25 quid to zero incrementally but your case seems to state that they take the last 4 available statements and average the ppi element and run that backwards..... For my case that would make a difference of about 2k before it gets applied to the outstanding balance which would be quite a difference. Did, when you got the breakdown, they apply any interest to the amount of charges they reconstructed? Anyway good luck with getting some restitution from B/C!

Sc

Link to post
Share on other sites

it would be interesting going to the FOS.

 

there is no way, they would rule that you

made no transaction on a card for xxxyrs.

so were owed nowt

 

that eould not be fair and resonable

 

and i doubt they'd agree with BC on that statement principle.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...