Very Old Barclaycard Charges ***Settled by way of Tomlin Order***

[tnook]

Asked them how they generate their reference numbers and what is preventing them regenerating it. 

[craigten]

Tnook, do me a favour - use the Live Chat facility on the ICO’s website tomorrow (today?) and ask them about the claim made by Barclays - that they admit to probably having the data but their own referencing issues are making it difficult, not impossible, to make the search. See what they say - screenshot what they say and use the facility to email yourself the transcript - then send that to the solicitor you’re dealing with. 
Please try this....let us know what the ICO say. They’ll probably include the usual ‘we can’t state categorically without knowing the details’ but press them on this issue specifically!!

Having something from them to quote will help your case no end!!!

[tnook]

Thanks Craigten. Generic woolly reply from IOC. 
 

Solicitor has gone quiet even though all their ‘deadlines’ have passed. I wonder if they are busy chasing a response to my last question about how they generated their references and why they can’t regenerate it. 

[craigten]

Interesting stuff!

Last time I had one of those vague responses via their instant chat, I rang them and got enough spoken word from them that I used it to my advantage. Record the call as I did. I think you’ll be surprised at how much sway it will hold when going to court - what judge will (at small claims level) enjoy arguing against ICO?

[tnook]

Just this minute. 
 

I GOT MY STATEMENTS!!!!!!

 

[noomill060]

Yeah baby, now screw them for everything including 20 years compunded

 interest at the contractual rate!

[noomill060]

As it now clear that microfiched data can be retrieved, and are not destroyed  after 6 years I will now reopen my claim against them for my 1986 statements. It now appears I settled my claim in 2007 based on false information provided by Barclays and the ICO.

[craigten]

44 minutes ago, noomill060 said:

As it now clear that microfiched data can be retrieved, and are not destroyed  after 6 years I will now reopen my claim against them for my 1986 statements. It now appears I settled my claim in 2007 based on false information provided by Barclays and the ICO.

 

1 hour ago, tnook said:

Just this minute. 
 

I GOT MY STATEMENTS!!!!!!

 

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[slick132]

Excellent news Tnook and well done for persevering.

 

This is important, not just for you, but for anyone looking for retrieve older data from BC.

 

 

[slick132]

Once you've had a chance to review the data properly, please confirm your intentions.

 

I suggest you start a new thread when you''re ready, if you intend to reclaim penalty charges.

 

No need to have 11 pages to wade through for the reclaim case.

[AndyOrch]

Well done.....no wonder they wanted to put pressure on you to settle yesterday and then found them today.....remarkable.

[craigten]

It’s unreal! Banks really are untrustworthy . How dare anyone suggest otherwise.

[dx100uk]

IMHO they had them all along and even knew how to recover them, but flew that kite to avoid what I pointed too in post 227.

[tnook]

Ok. I may have celebrated too soon. They gave me my statements from 2001-2004. Which is great! They are sticking to the line “we don’t have statements pre 2001”

 

This was their solicitor:

 

 

Dear xX

 

As confirmed on our email of yesterday, the Bank is unable to conduct a reasonable and proportionate search for documents in circumstances where the reference number is no longer available, with any attempt to locate documents needing to be conducted on a purely manual basis.  

 

In advance of the hearing, and in order to assist you and the Court to the fullest extent possible, the Bank has spent a considerable amount of time and resource over the last few days in conducting a further manual search of microfiche in order to determine whether any of the documents that you have requested can be located.

 

The search has recovered the attached statements for card numbers    and from January 2001 to May 2004; and card numbers and  from July 2003 to May 2004 (copies attached). Our client is now able to confirm that no further data in respect of all four if the above accounts is held for you in microfiche. As previously discussed microfiche does not hold any statements dated before January 2001.

 

Notwithstanding the above, the Bank’s position remains that it carried out reasonable and proportionate searches when it received your initial request and has exceeded its GDPR obligations in carrying out the manual microfiche search. 

 

As you have now been provided with the requested documents, we should be grateful if you could confirm if you accept the Bank’s offer of £150 in full and final settlement of your claim. We look forward to receiving your confirmation by no later than 12.00pm on 29 November 2019.

[AndyOrch]

 Well they have gone back as far as reasonable ( In the eyes of the court) and only 2 years missing which is not held on microfiche...the court cant order whats not available.

 

Perhaps take their offer now and draw a line ?

 

Andy

[tnook]

I most certainly will. I am pragmatic, there is enough here now to mount phase 2.  See you all in the new compounded contractual interest thread. 

[tnook]

Looking at the notes they sent. It looks like BC regenerated the missing reference number. They included a page with hand written notes breaking the account numbers into new numbers. 
 

I think my last email to the solicitor did the trick. Asking how the reference numbers are generated and why they can’t be regenerated. I was preparing to cross examine their hearsay witness about it. 

[tnook]

Replied to the solicitor that I would be delighted to settle as soon as the funds (£150) are in my account. 
 

No doubt they will slip in the non-disclosure clause in the settlement. 

[tnook]

Here is the settlement offer. Which includes the NDA. Also a clause (5) saying I won’t pursue a further claim based on the subject matter if this claim. Would that preclude my next phase of claiming the charges?

 

—————
3 The parties acknowledge that this Agreement is entered into in connection with the compromise of disputed matters and in light of other considerations. It is not, and shall not be represented or construed as an admission of liability or wrongdoing by any of the parties to this Agreement or any other person or entity.

4 In consideration for the Settlement Sum, the Claimant hereby releases and discharges the Defendant, its employees, successors and assigns from any and all damages, liabilities, interest, costs and obligations, past, present and future, howsoever and whensoever arising, whether known or unknown that the Claimant had, have or may have at any time and in the future against the Defendant, arising out of or connected to the subject matter of the Claim.

5 The Claimant agrees that all circumstances surrounding the Claim and the terms of this agreement and/or any negotiations surrounding it are to remain confidential and that the Claimant (and/or her legal advisor(s)) shall not disclose the same to any third party, except with the prior written consent of the Defendant, or except to the extent required by law or for the purposes of enforcing the terms of this agreement.

6 For the avoidance of doubt, the Defendant shall be entitled to disclose the terms of this agreement to its regulators, subsidiaries, affiliates, auditors, officers and employees.

7 Nothing in this Schedule shall affect any indebtedness the Claimant has and/or may have to the Defendant.

8 The validity, construction, enforcement and all other matters arising in connection with this agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with English Law and the Courts of England and Wales shall have exclusive jurisdiction in relation to all disputes in connection with this agreement.

[slick132]

Hi Tnook,

 

It's Para's 4 and 5 that concern me but I hope Anyorch will drop in to clarify.

 

I would refuse to agree to Para 4 as it could compromise a penalty charge reclaim.

 

And clause 5 should be refused because you do not agree to confidentiality.

[tnook]

They continue to be stubborn:

 

Dear xx, 

 

Our position is that paragraph 4 is specific to the subject matter of this claim. If you are dissatisfied with the wording of the Tomlin Order, please provide us with the alternative wording you propose and we shall take instructions.

 

As this matter concerns a request for disclosure of data relating only to your personal accounts we do not understand why you consider that the terms of settlement should not remain confidential between the parties. 

 

In the meantime, we can confirm that we have received confirmation from the Bank that the settlement sum can be paid into your current account today but can take up to 3 days to show in your account. Once the Tomlin Order has been signed we shall arrange payment. As previously confirmed, we will send you a version for signature via DocuSign once you have confirmed that it is agreed.

[dx100uk]

So you have other accounts with them that are not personal??reason

 

No they just dont want the word getting out they do hold such data as i bet there are 10'000 of people that have had their claims rejected for this very reason...

And they dont want to lose another £10M 

Pers i think the fca and the fos should see this admittance barclays have LIED all these years

 

[tnook]

Yeah I said I didn't want confidentiality, she asked why not. Also rejected clause 4 as it potentially limited my options.

 

Court hearing is still Tuesday. I have my statements. They'd better hurry up or I'll inform the judge they are making it hard to settle by imposing unreasonable clauses.

[tnook]

Sorry to tag you @Andyorch. Settlement is not complete and the hearing is on Tuesday. Is the following paragraph in their settlement offer going to interfere with my next claim on charges?

 

4 In consideration for the Settlement Sum, the Claimant hereby releases and discharges the Defendant, its employees, successors and assigns from any and all damages, liabilities, interest, costs and obligations, past, present and future, howsoever and whensoever arising, whether known or unknown that the Claimant had, have or may have at any time and in the future against the Defendant, arising out of or connected to the subject matter of the Claim.

[slick132]

Hi Tnook

 

Reading the wording of "4", | think this agreement between you and BC  is about "the subject matter of the Claim" MEANING this claim for data, so you should still be free to pursue penalty charge reclaims

 

But I will see if Andyorch can give opinion .......