Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 4 th time we've merged your threads  for complete history of your story please keeps to one thread
    • @dx100uk @ anyone else interested in Fighting HSBC UK  Staff/department non compliance and incompetence/interference in between HSBC UK and customers.   I wanted to know what you guys had to say about the reply i got from HSBC UK today.    Recap. I originally turned to HSBC UK to be reunited with Money i saved in accounts that where frozen and made dormant during the year 1995.   HSBC UK Teams tell me that HSBC UK only allows them to have access to account records dated back 6 years. there for they do not have the records, can not locate the records i requested for in my SAR. there for HSBC UK teams Ignored my SAR application for records of accounts made frozen and dormant during the year 1995. HSBC then claim if the accounts where closed they will no longer hold records of these accounts and tell that to the ICO. I again explained to HSBC UK and the ICO the records of accounts where left frozen and dormant.   HSBC UK teams continue to tell me over the phone that The records i requested for in my SAR, will not be located or do not exist because HSBC only allows them to have access to records of accounts dated back 6 years.    I returned to HSBC highlighting there is no such provision in the Data Protection Act.   HSBC UK teams today totally ignored my complaint again and confirmed with me they are classing my complaint as wanting to locate accounts that where closed.   Let me know what you think about the  HSBC UK teams response to my last complaint. Is there any other letters i can send them to confirm thay are not correct about what they have done.    The HSBC UK letter starts of by:You've been unable to recover funds you held in HSBC UK Accounts that were closed in 1994 to 1995, and to obtain the account details for the accounts concerned. You've been advised that we only retain records for up to 6 years, but you've been unable to locate any provision for this within the Data Protection Act (DPA). You require a Certificate of Destruction from HSBC UK to evidence the destruction of the data concerned. You feel your Subject Access Request (SAR) has been ignored by HSBC UK.   HSBC UK Teams now go on to explain: In respect of you being advised we only retain records for up to 6 years, but having been unable to locate any  provision for this within the Data Protection Act (DPA), I can confirm that under the DPA, we are obliged to only keep records for as long as we deem necessary, in order to effectively manage our data. So, for most cases, this will be for no more than 6 years.   In regards to your request for a Certificate of Destruction from HSBC UK to evidence the destruction of the data concerned, I regret that this isn't something that we can provide, as we don't keep records of when individual customer data was destroyed. I'd also like to clarify that if the accounts concerned were closed after becoming dormant, that we would have sent you closing statements at the time.   Lastly, I'm sorry you feel we've ignored your SAR. I want to assure you that we'll always look to accommodate a request for a SAR as best as we can. However, if we're unable to locate the account details and information required, this will mean we're unable to fulfil the request, which has unfortunately been the case on this occasion.   How else do you think i can highlight to HSBC that the teams dealing with My complaint, and request to be reunited with my money is not going to departments that can deal with my demand for services.?  
    • Hi   I have to agree if you have paid off the debt owed to them via this meter and are up to date on your bills  I would look at changing supplier and as said asking new supplier to install a standard meter and look for the best deals for you.
    • I have severe anxiety and going to leave my job and have been invited to a meeting but dont wish to attend that is three hours away from where I am. Can I legally give the  permission to decide without my being there? I cannot handle going as I know I'm going to be fired anyway as on my final warning. I'm also giving in my notice this week too! This job is just too much for me now and I cannot work here any longer. It's no good for my health and sanity  I am sick to my stomach thinking about going and about to hand my notice in anyway    
    • Thankyou it’s because I’m awaiting the outcome and a friend said I will be turned down as I asked them a while back if I had ppi on the account and how much it was and they replied.  But they did only send me a short confirmation with the amount and that they trust that answers my enquiry. i just wanted to be prepared if they wouldn’t turn me down based on that. Thanks for your advice on that mate 
  • Our picks

legalistic

Brexit, the Leavocrats

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1167 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

A programme is coming up on BBC Radio 4 that sounds as if it will be genuinely informative about Brexit. It's "Brexit, The Leavocrats". In it former head of the Civil Service, Gus O'Donnell, goes behind the scenes at the Department for Exiting the EU to find out what's going on. The programme airs on Wed morning (31 Aug) at 11.00 a.m. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07qbcb6

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest it will mean nothing in reality. The UK cannot negotiate any trade deals etc until Article 50 has been triggered as that is Treaty Law

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To be honest it will mean nothing in reality. The UK cannot negotiate any trade deals etc until Article 50 has been triggered as that is Treaty Law

 

Can you put in a link to that law please ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T.F.E.U

 

Under the article 50 procedure, member states must first negotiate the terms of their departure before negotiating a future deal with the EU.

Edited by obiter dictum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not a link to the article ?

 

That is just the initials of the "Reform Treaty", the one welcher Gordon Brown promised we could have a referendum on and then refused us.

Edited by Conniff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Under the terms of the T.F.E.U a member state cannot negotiate its own seperate trade deals as all member states are equal. Similarly, individual member states cannot make trade deals with third countries on their own.

 

Because the UK will remain a full member of the EU throughout the negotiating period set out in Article 50, it could only formally sign trade deals with other countries once it has left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EU is a customs union defined by the WTO. As such no member state can set their own tariff

 

The only way to change that is to exit the single market

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks legalistic at least someone knows what a link is.

 

I see nothing whatsoever in there about it being law you cannot negotiate a trade deal:

 

Article 50

 

 

1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

 

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

 

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

 

4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

 

A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

 

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidentally, there was a trail of Brexit the Leavocrats on Radio 4 yesterday. Gus O'Donnell was interviewed.

He was of the opinion that we need a firm idea of what kind of entity we wish to be outside of the EU before we start negotiating.

 

He basically said that we don't yet have a clue as to what we want !

That makes sense given that Brexit was essentially an "I hate all foreigners" campaign.

 

Apologies for the way my text won't come out in paragraphs. I've tried everything.

Edited by Conniff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But do you not think that should have been explored and decided before the Referendum vote was called?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it should, that's one of the crazy things about the Referendum.

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Theresa May is in a very difficult position of knowing that the Brexit process will prove to be very difficult and there will be many heated arguments. She has to try to keep as many people as happy as possible and at the moment she has no alternative but to say they are going ahead with Brexit to support the democratic vote. When anyone says that Parliament will attempt to block it or suggests another referendum, she has to get no.10 officials to make a statement saying it won't happen, Brexit is proceeding ahead etc. She has no choice.

 

My opinion for what it is worth, after reading a number of different articles, is that Brexit is unlikely to happen before the date of the next election in May 2020. Article 50 may not be triggered until late in 2017, if they wait for outcomes of elections in several EU country elections. It may not be triggered until 2018 or at all. Government have got quite a lot of work to do, looking at their negotiating positions on a huge number of issues. They have to understand the needs of businesses and rights of people etc. It is going to be very complex, once they get down to looking at the details. It is going to take much longer than the 2 years that article 50 initially allows. Why trigger article 50, until you have a clear position of what you want to achieve that meets all of your objectives ?

 

They might eventually get to a position, where circumstances mean that a government has to offer another referendum. No one can rule this out.


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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another cause for debate is that in my opinion another Referendum will be needed by statute. That statute being the European Union Act 2011 and the referendum lock.

 

That stipuates that any renegotiation of any new Treaties with the EU before ratification will require a referendum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a look at http://www.eureferendum.com there exit options are explored. Far more sensible than the chuntering coming out of the Westminster and Brussels bubbles.


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 OTHER

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To quote Donald Rumsfelds famous press conference.

 

" Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones "

 

I think the current Brexit position is pretty well summed up by this.


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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You nailed it to a tee UB.


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 OTHER

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gina Miller's legal challenge on the whole Brexit matter, which is scheduled for a hearing in mid-October, should be interesting and might go to the Supreme Court: http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-legal-idUKKCN10119V I'm also wondering whether, before the referendum, the government complied with s7(1) of the European Referendum Act 2015 by supplying all the information the electorate needed in order to make its decision: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/section/7/enacted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...