kateandpete V Ikano - DECEPTION!

[kateandpete]

Here's a corker folks.

 

Ikea card from about around August 2000. We suspect charges. Account has been dead since around 2003. Interestingly, this only occured to us because the account is still listed on Experian and Equifax credit reference parasite (sorry should read agency ) reports.

 

We Data Protection Act-S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)'d them. We didn't have an account number so on the SAR we put date of birth, all addresses linked on the CRA reports. This was done 26/09/06. We specifically said, "Please supply me with ALL personal data you have in your records". Remember this folks! We then stated that the data should include, but not be limited to a complete list of transactions and charges, manual interventions, yadda yadda yadda.

 

On 05/10/06 we get a letter from them...

Thank you for your recent letter regarding your account. I am pleased to advise you that no charges have been applied to your account over the last 6 years.

Yours,

Angela Forde

WTF!

No account number, no details of transactions. NOTHING. NADA. ZIP.

They literally just asserted that there were no charges. The bare-faced cheek of these people. Nevertheless, this meant that they had found something, eh?

 

Needless to say, we wouldn't let it lie.

 

On 12/10/06 we wrote this back...

I refer to your letter dated 5th October regarding the above account. Please note the highlighted wording in the duplicated DPA request I enclode. I do not feel that Ikano has complied fully by giving me NO details of the account AT ALL other than your assertion that no charges were applied. Please send to me all data help by Ikano regarding my account. The 40 day timescale outlined in my last letter will still apply, and should I feel that Ikano has failed to carry out its obligations under the Data Protection Act in this time I shall report this matter to the Infomation Commissioner.

Yours,

kateandpete

We received another letter from them on the 1st November. Sit down for this one:rolleyes:.

 

Thank you for your recent letter. Please find a list of transactions applied to your account as requested.

Yours

Angela Forde

 

ENCLOSURE:

 

List of transactions applied to account number XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

kateandpete

 

02/10/2000 £15 Arrears Fee

02/09/2001 £15 Arrears Fee

07/10/2001 £15- Arrears Fee Refunded

21/09/2001 £15 Arrears Fee

 

So:

1. They LIED in the first letter.

 

2. They assert that I never bought anything with this card. Well I have a sofa that proves otherwise. They never received any payments. They never charged any interest. Is this really a "complete list of transactions". I think not.

 

3. Their 40 days is up.

 

Pardon me for making unfounded suggestions, but I think that they've lost the lot and are making everything up as they go along.

 

This is blatent DECEPTION. I'm sending all correspondence straight to the Information Commissioners Office for a start. I really want to hammer them for this. How can they hold a consumer credit licence and be a data controller and LIE LIE LIE to the consumer.

 

This is a big deal in my opinion.

 

I want suggestions on the best way to turn the thumbscrews on this lot.

[BankFodder]

Give them 14 days LBA threatening them with s.7 DPA non-compliance action.

If they don't respond with a full dislcosure then give them the Good News without more ado.

 

It will cost you £150 on a part 8 form but from what you say, they can't win and so the money will come back with no probs.

[kateandpete]

Thanks BF

[CrispDust]

Ikano play hard ball, but I think its because their intelligence is the same as their products - no substance

[kateandpete]

Lots to update on this...

 

I hope i've not done the wrong thing BF (re a part 8 )8). I issued an N1 claim similar to that of Alanfromderby in the templates section. I.e. Seeking an order under sections 7 and 15(2) of the Data Protection Act, and for damages. I added up the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) fee, postage and time spent preparing at £9 per hour. This totalled £30. Then the court fee was only £30.

 

Today, I received a "without prejudice" letter from them, here it is....

 

I write further to your recent correspondence and court claim which has now been

issued.

Having considered the matter with the Director of credit Services, as a gesture of

goodwill we are willing to make you an offer to settle your claim in the sum of £60.00

as it will not be economical for us to defend this claim.

If you wish to accept this offer in full and final settlement of your claim, please can

you sign the enclosed duplicate letter as soon as possible and return it to me, you will

also need to notify the court that the claim has been resolved amicably so that the

claim can be withdrawn from the court system.

Please can you let me know in the next 7 days if you wish to accept as after this time

the matter will be referred to the legal team for further action.

 

Note, they haven't acknowledged the claim yet.

 

I've written this back to them

 

I am in receipt of your letter marked “without prejudice” dated 27th November.

 

I refuse your offer of settlement.

 

Forgive my presumption, but I do not believe you have read my particulars of claim. This claim is seeking an order under sections 7 and 15 of the Data Protection Act 1998. The monetary value of the claim is merely in respect of damages I have suffered because of your breaches of said Act. I seek compliance with the Act and will settle for nothing less, particularly in the light of your attempt to deceive me. Please refer to my letter of 6th November for details of what I require, I do not intend to repeat this.

 

I remind you that you have until the 8th December to reply to the court, if you have not done so by this date I will ask for judgement.

Hope this is all ok.

BTW i've sent all the correspondence to the Information Commissioners Office - but no reply yet. Guess they're snowed under.

[CrispDust]

Looks similar to the reply I received initially.

Just keep pushing. Have you a rough estimate of the total unlawful charges?

If so then send your prelim request then LBA, possibly with an overestimated figure, with the proviso that this may change when Ikano rovide the data requested under SAR.

I don't think they are snowed under, just numpties