RBS Mint Card PPI REclaiming help **WON**

[siriusb]

Hi,

 

Well I don't seem to be having much luck on the CCA front!

 

The latest reply regarding my MINT account is that they cannot procees my request as they require my signature.

 

In the request I sent off I included the £1 postal order and relevant details, and signed the letter electronically (as per advice on the forum).

 

So what can I do now? This is a card I took out in mid 2004 and the account is defaulted and being managed through the CCCS (but i still get a statement every month directly from MINT).

 

I don't want to give them my signature to add to a document if they dont already have it, but I'm not sure how to progress from here.

 

Any ideas?

 

Hx

[Grotesque]

Can they copy the signature onto forms etc once you give it them? -and has that been done?

[siriusb]

That what i am worried about.

 

I know it sounds a bit paranoid but all the advice points towards not giving them a signature, but if they won't process the request without it i'm a bit in limbo....

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Can they copy the signature onto forms etc once you give it them? -and has that been done?

 

Not ever proven in my experience, one of many old wives tales!!

 

There is no specific requirement for a signature on a CCA request, but I have never seen good cause not to sign SARs or CCA requests.

[dx100uk]

Select committee on Trade and Industry minutes of evidence (1996 Legislative working party)

 

2. The working party looked at the legal issues regarding the terms document, writing, signature, instrument, and records of transactions and originality. The Government's current proposed legislation focuses particularly upon the issue of signature. The working party considered the leading case in English law on signature methods, Goodman -v- J Eban Limited.

That decision established that:

2.1 mechanical signatures using rubber stamps, printing or typewriting were valid in english law;

2.2 a signature can be by a mark rather than a name as long as evidence can be given to indentify the placer of the mark and the intention to sign; and

2.3 words other than a name can amount to a signature if the necessary intention to sign can be proven

 

Now although this working party was looking into the Electronics Commerce Bill it points to . .

Goodman v J Eban Ltd (1954)

 

A solicitor signed a solicitors bill with a rubber stamp which contained the name of the law firm. In the judgment it was determined that the rubber stamp was a valid signature, even theough the Solicitors Act of 1932 required a solicitors bill to be signed; it was established that it is enough to demonstrate that the rubber stamp was affixed by the solicitor with the intention to sign the solicitor's bill.

 

So now taking the highlights above I go to:

Interpretations act 1978

Schedule 1

1973 c.37.

 

"Writing" includes typing, lithograpgy, photography or other modes of representing or reproducing words in a visible form and expressions refering to writing can be construed accordingly

 

Also;

[/i][/b]

Data Protection Act Good Practice Notes:

 

2. Do you have enough information to be sure of the requester’s identity?

Often you will have no reason to doubt a person’s identity. For example, if a person with whom you have regular contact sends a letter from their known address it may be safe to assume that they are who they say they are.

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/practical_application/checklist_for_handling_requests_for_personal_information.pdf

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=8861&d=1242456802

[siriusb]

So although an electronic signature technically should be enough, especially in light of the fact they send statements to my house monthly so they have fair belief I am who i purport to be, there is no real risk/implicationd from me signing a letter to them?

 

Maybe I should just go for a different signature.....

[Old Cogger]

So although an electronic signature technically should be enough, especially in light of the fact they send statements to my house monthly so they have fair belief I am who i purport to be, there is no real risk/implicationd from me signing a letter to them?

 

Maybe I should just go for a different signature.....

 

or use;-

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

It's all very well being 'pedantic' about these things but all it achieves is a delay in getting the data you require:wink:

[siriusb]

No plans to be a pedant just yet...but not enough knowledge on the subject so don't wish to shoot myself in the foot long term.

 

Bottom line - if i understand it correctly is a CCA request doesn't not LEGALLY require an authentic signature?

[Grotesque]

or use;-

 

Interesting, how does that work?

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

The is NO specific requirement for this, a CCA is purely a request for information, lack of a CCA does not mean the debt does not exist and is not collectable.

[Old Cogger]

Interesting, how does that work?

 

copy & paste to letter

[siriusb]

I understand that it doesn't remove the debt... and if what i have read make sense it has more to do with implications of enforceability...

...if they don't have one it's just a bit more gris to my mill once all ppi etc has been claimed back (if i ever get that far!)

[siriusb]

Hi all,

 

One of the credit card companies I am claiming from has rung today and will be calling back after 5pm to discuss my PPI claim.

 

Is this normal? Is there anything I should be careful of? I don't have the facilities to record the call so should I just find out what they want and then ask them to put in writing?

 

It's an account I have had from 2006 but I am still waiting for my additional SAR info (as they only sent me through copy statements and nothing else) so i don't want to be caught on the hop.

 

Hx

Edited September 2, 2013 by siriusb

[dx100uk]

as already stated

 

we do not recommend answering any PPI questions on the phone

 

the calls are usually pre loaded questions asked in such a way as to defeat your claim

or even dismiss ittotally or reduce the reclaim.

 

everything in writing as you wish to complain to the FOS

if they do not refund you properly.

 

simply say, sorry, I wish your questions in WRITING for FOS purposes.

 

dx

[siriusb]

Hi,

 

Thanks DX - I am sure I remembered reading that on another post but couldn't re-find it.

 

Will be as nice to the chap (and he was a very friendsly chap but I know when people are trying to disarm me) as he was to me but will request everything in writing in case it is not found in my favourand then we both have an indisputable paper trail for FOS or Court.

 

hx

[dx100uk]

why do you think they are appearing to be nice...think about it

for the sake of one phonecall they could say themselves £1000's

 

ps it might well serve your end result better to not make so many disjointed threads

 

if you take a look at the ones you've already started on PPI

there are loads of them

 

better to stick to a single thread per company reclaim

else you do lose info and we don't know whats already been advised.

 

dx

[renegadeimp]

If they call, refuse to talk to them and just say you want everything in writing. Don't get into a conversation, and dont start listening to what they say. Simply state that, and put the phone down.

[siriusb]

Apologies - I'm still trying to get used to where certain things go i.e other institutions or Egg, or PPI or RBS and whether different queries need different headings/entries.

 

Quite happy for them to be put in the right place

[siriusb]

How bizarre!

 

I'm trying not to get paranoid...

 

...in one day I have had phone calls from two credit cards about my ppi claims!

 

The one who was going to ring back after 5pm never bothered. Tut tut!

 

Another one rang just before 8pm. Once again a very nice bloke...wanted to know what i remembered about opening the account. I replied that questions like that needed to be put in writing, which he said he'd do. He them implied that as the 8 weeks was up in 3 weeks time it was down to me..... How naughty!

 

Strikes me as odd having two phone calls on one day!

[siriusb]

Hi,

 

Have received letters from both of these creditors today asking very similar questions i.e what do I recall about the sale, my recollection of what the sales material said about my medical condition, why i believed the insurance was not optional, when my medical condition was diagnosed and what is my understanding of how this condition would affect a claim.

 

I'm still waiting for additional info from one of them as they only sent a partial sar (just statements) and the other one hasn't sent anything at all yet.

 

They both say they won't be able to investigate my claim further until they have answers to these questions.

 

Do I just wait for the SAR info and take it from there? The only thing I can say with any certainty is that i can confirm when my medical condition started.

 

Any ideas?

[dx100uk]

why would your medical condition be relevant on any PPI claim?

 

have you used it as an excuse or something.

 

what 'part' if any, have YOU indicated that YOUR medical condition is even relevant on your reclaiming?

 

dx

[siriusb]

I have not used my medical condition as main reason for mis-selling, but I have said that I am now aware PPI tends to have exclusions and that as I was never made aware of this (in that no-one ever discussed PPI with me re it's scope or limitations) I do not believe it would have paid out.

 

Does that make sense?

[dx100uk]

if you 'had' a pre existing medical condition

and

you had of made a claim against the PPI whereby that condition was the main reason for the claim

the claim would have been refused, as the condition was a pre-existing one, thus not covered by PPI.

 

if you told them or was not asked about it when you 'signed up', then that is ONE reason the PPI would latterly be useless.

 

seems to me you might have used what we call the 'scatter-gun' approach to treclaiming PPI.

 

never a good idea

 

dx

[siriusb]

Yes - I totally agree. It's all new to me and I am trying to be more methodical and organized now. I know it's retrospective but I have to work with that now.

 

My inclination is to wait for the remainder of the sar from one and all of it from another.

 

I'm not sure whether me holding off replying for a couple of weeks will be an issue overall.