Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Changes in the US are enticing more people to file bankruptcy to clear their student loans.View the full article
    • Servicing Stop Limited Registered Office Address: 57 London Rd, Enfield, Middlesex, England, EN2 6DU Company Type: Private Limited Company Company Status: Active Company Number: 06558606 Directors: Oliver Joseph Richmond Appointed 8th April 2008, Toby Robert Richmond Appointed 8th September 2009 Companies House Link: SERVICING STOP LIMITED overview - Find and update company information - GOV.UK FIND-AND-UPDATE.COMPANY-INFORMATION.SERVICE.GOV.UK SERVICING STOP LIMITED - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual...   Endole Link: Servicing Stop Limited - Company Profile - Endole SUITE.ENDOLE.CO.UK Servicing Stop Limited is an active company located in Enfield, Greater London. View Servicing Stop Limited profile, shareholders, contacts...  
    • Hi I assume the Loft Conversion with the eaves and crawl space was there when you initially purchased the property. Even in done after purchasing the property and the correct permissions were in place i.e. Local Authority, Land Registry, Freeholder which is Southern Land which would be required as a Leasehold property. The difficulty is if the Loft Conversion was there when you purchased the property and there is no evidence in your documents of the eaves and crawl space due to where the Red Lines stop in the plans or even after purchase it was added this is the reason you are having issues with selling due to those missing Red Lines in the Plans and any other Buyers competent Solicitor would flag this up. I can understand the reasons the Buyer wishes a Deed of Variation probably there Solicitor requesting this to ensure those missing red lines are covered before the Sale as they Flagged this as an issue as Red Lines missing on Plans and want buyer protected. As for the £8000 costs Together and cohort Southern Land are trying to charge have you thought of contacting a few Property Solicitors yourself to get a few quotes. (only mention this because when I research this possible costs can range from £500 - £2000 depending on the Deed of Variation work required and nothing to stop you doing this then approaching Together and cohorts with it) Also ask Together/Southern Land for a breakdown of the £8000 costs for the Deed of Variation. Yup do send both Together and Southern Land a Subject Access Request (SAR) requesting 'ALL DATA' that simple phrase covers whatever format they hold that data in whether it be emails, written, recorded calls etc. They then have 30 Calendar Days to respond and that time limit only starts once they acknowledge receipt of your SAR Request. When you purchased the property some 17yrs ago are the Solicitors that you went through at that time still operating? (I know probably a silly question but if they are nothing to stop you contacting them and asking them about this especially if the Loft Conversion was in place when you purchased the property) Another link that will be useful to you as Leasehold is The Leasehold Advisory Service: Home - The Leasehold Advisory Service WWW.LEASE-ADVICE.ORG Government funded, independent advice for residential leaseholders and park home residents  
    • Why struggling parents aren't choosing cheaper brands when it comes to infant formula milk.View the full article
    • Musk's profane attack on advertisers baffled experts - without adverts, how would X survive?View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • 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
    • Post in Some advice on buying a used car
    • People are still buying used cars unseen, paying by cash or by bank transfer, relying on brand-new MOT's by the dealer's favourite MOT station….
      It always leads to tears!
      used car.mp4


    • Pizza delivery insurance.mp4




      Parcel delivery insurance 1.mp4
        • Haha
      • 2 replies
  • Recommended Topics

Customer Compliance interview and privacy

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3482 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

Hi everyone,


I have received a letter with an appointment for an Customer Compliance interview to take place next week. From what I have read there's nothing to worry about if I have nothing to hide, so I'm not worried and haven't even bothered with legal advice. I have collected/printed my bank statements and all the documentation they want to see already, all arranged in a folder ready for their perusal. My situation is quite straighforward, unlike some I've seen in other posts with partners and children involved, so I can't see there being any potential for complications in my case.


I do have a concern, however:

1) I find it intrusive to my privacy for someone to comb through all my transactions and be able to see what I bought from where. I'd imagine they're more interested in seeing what goes in and how much money I have in total. No problem, it's all there black on white. I don't even have a problem with them seeing how much I spend, but I'm sure anyone who has nothing to hide still has normal card transactions that are intimate and personal.

Am I being unreasonable in feeling which underwear shop I use and what subscriptions I have should really be private?


Ultimately the answer I'm looking for is very specific, and nobody at the DWP seems to know the answer: Can I redact my statements so that they still show the balance and how much has gone in and been spent, but not necessarily the transaction details? I'm talking small amounts, nothing over a few dozen quid.


Thanks in advance!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would you when you have nothing to hide ?The compliance officer will look at dozens of bank statements a day, they couldn't care less where you buy your undies, it probably wouldn't even register. What will register is a load of crossed out/ blacked out lines, they would raise questions and suspicions - its human nature. My advice is just show the statements - why not ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people just value their privacy more than others, I don't judge if you won't :)


Just because a Gynaecologist sees dozens of lady bits every day it doesn't make it any less awkward for me to go through a scrape and I'd rather not do it if I didn't absolutely have to. But then maybe I have something to hide...:der:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically, the only answer is that you could give it a shot, and let the interviewing officer decide if it's OK. But I'd advise against it because if he or she decides it's not OK, well, you just have to go through the whole thing all over again.


You don't have a specific legal right to privacy when claiming benefits, as such. You are entitled to expect that the DWP requests only the information that is relevant to your claim.


So again, I think it's not possible to give a single, definitively correct answer to your question. All I can say is that it's probably more trouble than it's worth to go to battle on this one.




The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough. I will have redacted and unredacted printouts of my statements ready. If he/she sympathises with my argument good, otherwise they can look at their own peril!

Thanks Antone!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough. I will have redacted and unredacted printouts of my statements ready. If he/she sympathises with my argument good, otherwise they can look at their own peril!

Thanks Antone!


That sounds like a fair compromise.




The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...