Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you so much for heads up.
    • Thanks DX - I wondered about the blacked out bits. That's their doing not mine obviously.   Attached is the exhibits part of the bundle. Sorry about this, no matter what I compressed the whole thing down to I got the oversize message, even if the filesize on my computer was showing as well under 4.8mb   The_exhibits-compressed.pdf
    • Thanks Bankfodder!   Hello again everyone.    I received my SAR back from Elderbridge and what and absolute load of **** it is!   1.  They did not send any transcripts or recordings of any phones calls  - both myself and my husband spoke to them in Aug 2016 (noted in their diary notes) and I called them in Dec 2018 (again noted in their diary notes) it was the same day they sent the reply even though they have mentioned me calling in their notes on that day, so not sure I should let that go or not!   I also spoke to them in July 2016 (again in the notes) and I spoke to them in Dec 2012 (again in the notes)    2.  Going through the diary notes in the beginning notes were sporadic mainly because we were making payment and everything was ok, then later as things changed there were notes almost once a month, then in NOV 2012 and Dec 2012 frequency of notes increase as this is when they began court proceedings.  and throughout 2013 again lots of notes made - mostly their in house stuff about court dealings and so on - so that's fine. then in NOV 2013 hey made a not re the court date in OCT - saying that they were ordered to treat the loan as having a fixed rate from inception and sent off etc.  BUT from 21 Nov 2013 to 17th June 2014 there are no notes at all!  Now the hearing was on the 10th Jan 2014!   17/06/2014 14:43 *****Substantial EVS costs to be added to any SF ****** 17/06/2014 14:43 EVS Defended + At the hearing on 10/01/2014 an SPO for 500 on 26/01/2014 and then CMI + £60 wef 26/02/2014 plus MJ for £103,331.03 suspended on the same terms. It was also held that we could add our costs - Defended costs on this case are £33,879.80. 17/06/2014 00:00 Reviewed Reviewed 17/06/2014 00:00 ***Defended Costs*****:To be added to any SF ***Defended Costs*****:To be added to any SF 21/11/2013 04:13 ADHOC Statement Printed From 03/10/13 To 13/11/13 Batch 2015 Sequence 28 Printed 13/11/2013 00:00:00   Above you can cleary see the gap then suddenly the first notes talk about the court case and costs etc, at the trial in OCT the judge reserved cost till the next hearing (also stated on the documentation from the court)  but then at that hearing in Jan 2014 we did not discuss costs - the 6 month gap I feel is very suspicious.    The final court document  dated 13th Jan 2014 says to pay the claimant £103,331.03 which is the amount outstanding under the mortgage and goes on to says order were not to be enforced as long as we pay etc.  no mention of costs at all - so they seem to just be adding them   3.   They sent a field agent to me in Jan 2018, I only knew this as on the 9th Jan 2018 I was working at home and heard the letterbox, thought it was the postman, went to the door to find an envelope shoved through the door with a letter in it saying they had been requested to visit me and that they called today but I was not in! and gave a number for me to call ( I saw the woman walking down the driveway - but she did not ring the bell! and I wasn't about to run after her!)   But in the notes they have written this utter lie!   30/01/2018 12:44 Field Agent Report Received The field agent visited the security address on three occasions. The customer was spoken to through the window. They refused to discuss and refused to answer the door. The contact number on file is not recognised. RFA - Not known Reasons for items not verified:N/A Details of variances of items outside of expenditure guidelines and reasons N/A Property is a detached house in good condation valued at £406,000. Equity not known. I actually cannot believe what I have read here! Can I ask them for some kind of proof of this, because I don't know who they are talking about but it certainly wasn't me!   4.  the documents they had sent me a joke, they have sent 77 documents in total, none of these are copies of letter from Elderbridge (which is who I sent the SAR to) all from First Plus and certainly not ALL of them, they have been bulked out by sending me copies of documents that I sent TO THEM for my court defence and there are strange Black boxes over some of the text!? which I don't understand!     After receiving this info from Elderbridge I decided to send a SAR to Barclays and I got a small package with a couple of letters, some diary notes and screen shot of the account, as well as a short statement of account. This was for our ORIGINAL loan from Feb 2006,  (we topped it up in June 2006) and the first one was closed.  The second one is the one that has been transferred to Elderbridge but Barclays seem to know be denying ALL knowledge of it! and I know that they still hold the beneficial interest of these loans and that Elderbridge regularly contact Barclays for help and advise - I have contact with other account holders who have diary notes from Elderbridge showing contact to Barclays!..   This week I also had a reply from the FOS (only from an adjudicator not an ombudsman) and his initial opion is that it's ok for Elderbridge to claim the costs as we defaulted, he seems to be ignoring my argument that the relationship is unfair etc but I will be sending this back and asking for it to be looked at by an ombudsman.   But was hoping that someone here could give me any advise re all of this - sorry I know it's a lot!!
    • why all the blanked out stuff in the parking contract? and no proof its paid this year either?  
    • pop the exhibits as a sep file i'll merge them for you
  • Our picks

king12345

Incomplete disclosure. How to punish them?

Recommended Posts

Hi, i submitted a sar to the naughty boys & girls at my management company and of course they didn't comply fully.

So I gave them some more time and pointed out what was missing.

For the past 4 weeks every Thursday I get the same email saying that they're still locating what i asked for and they'll come back to me end of following week.

So far it's been 2 months since my sar and of course at day 32 i reported them to the ico but nothing happened apart from obtaining a confirmation email that the complaint had been submitted.

Just for info, i knew they had dirty emails about me and other leaseholders and a couple of them were erroneously disclosed, so i asked for the replies and they're now panicking. 

Other email which I obtained by their mistake talks about covering up wrongdoings and surely there are replies to it which have not been disclosed.

They initially claimed that all replies were "off-record" (LOL), then that it was "financially sensitive material" (i.e. don't put that in the accounts, otherwise he'll find out we're milking it).+++

How do i take them to court for a nominal £1?

Would this be kicked out of court by upset judge?

Or the fact they breached the legislation forces the judge to find against them?

That considering that I would not accept any negotiations and go for judgement.

Also, should i wait for the ico?

Thanks for any input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could certainly bring a claim against them in the County Court.

If you want to do it the proper way – although rather more long-winded – you would bring a part 8 claim which is not a money claim and would probably have to be issued over-the-counter at the court.  The claim goes on to the multitrack which means that if you lose then you could be liable for the other side's costs. This would be the way to get a proper finding that they are in breach of their statutory duty. 

The easier way is simply to bring a small claim for a nominal sum – maybe £25 – justified by the distress that you have suffered (presumably you haven't suffered any pecuniary loss). On the basis of what you say this would bring a judgement in your favour and there will be an implication that they were in breach of statutory duty and I would certainly send a copy of the judgement to the ICO. Because it will be subject to the small claims rules then even if you lost you would not have to pay the other side's costs.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, thanks.

I just thought, if i wait for them to disclose more stuff, wouldn't that be hard evidence of their breach?

Would this make the section 8 much less risky?

 

If instead i went for the easy option of small claim £25, isn't there a risk that the judge would get mad, throw the case out and punish me with costs?

Or is a judge strictly bound to punish the party that did not respect the law?

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to be using the word "punish" a lot in this thread.

It's got nothing to do with punishment. It's simply about compensating you for your loss. Unusually, with data protection breaches you are entitled to put in a claim simply for distress that you might have suffered as a result of the breach. Furthermore, in small claims, costs are not order against the loser unless they litigate extremely unreasonably.

 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

That's what i mean.

Wouldn't the judge find it unreasonable to take a company to court for £25 without giving them a chance to settle out of court?

 

I use the word "punish" because this is what I want, a punishment for a long standing mick taking from their side.

They've given me most of the last 5 years charges back because their accounts are "incorrect" (so they call them).

Despite this they're always trying new ways to upset leaseholders,  me in particular.

Latest one was an attempted charge of over £500 sent to my wife instead of me, thinking "maybe she'll just pay it".

When challenged they sent a spreadsheet to justify this request,  but unfortunately it had been tampered with by some illiterate monkey and they made the balance £0.

They failed to explain these 2 points.

So, yes, I want to punish them badly, bruise them and if I could shut them down.

Edited by king12345

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi King 12345,

 

I'm running a similar thread (but haven't used the word punish...but I guess I should have, Lol)

 

I've been doing a lot of research on this and I will post two items that you may find of help. I believe they have 'infringed', rather than 'breached':

 

Link here, text below:

https://gdpr.algolia.com/gdpr-article-82

Art. 82 GDPR

Right to compensation and liability

  1. Any person who has suffered material or non-material damage as a result of an infringement of this Regulation shall have the right to receive compensation from the controller or processor for the damage suffered.
  2. 1Any controller involved in processing shall be liable for the damage caused by processing which infringes this Regulation. 2A processor shall be liable for the damage caused by processing only where it has not complied with obligations of this Regulation specifically directed to processors or where it has acted outside or contrary to lawful instructions of the controller.
  3. A controller or processor shall be exempt from liability under paragraph 2 if it proves that it is not in any way responsible for the event giving rise to the damage.
  4. Where more than one controller or processor, or both a controller and a processor, are involved in the same processing and where they are, under paragraphs 2 and 3, responsible for any damage caused by processing, each controller or processor shall be held liable for the entire damage in order to ensure effective compensation of the data subject.
  5. Where a controller or processor has, in accordance with paragraph 4, paid full compensation for the damage suffered, that controller or processor shall be entitled to claim back from the other controllers or processors involved in the same processing that part of the compensation corresponding to their part of responsibility for the damage, in accordance with the conditions set out in paragraph 2.
  6. Court proceedings for exercising the right to receive compensation shall be brought before the courts competent under the law of the Member State referred to in Article 79(2).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I use 'Live chat' with the ICO and it's really helpful. They advise that it can take up to three months for them to investigate...but it is hugely beneficial to go to court with that judgement behind you! Best to be safe than sorry!

 

I had this helpful post from mrabody on my other thread regarding quantifying compensation:

Take a look at Halliday v Creation Consumer Finance Limited. The claimant was awarded £750 for distress for what the court held to be a minor breach. 

 

https://www.hempsons.co.uk/news-articles/damages-distress-awarded-breach-data-protection-act/

 

In your case I would suggest the breach is considerably more serious as HSBC has lost your data.   They think it may have been destroyed but they have no proof. The fact is they have no clue as to where it is or who has it.   So in addition to the potential loss of your PPI refund I think the distress component is considerably higher than in Halliday. How much higher I cannot say - but you need to start canvassing the case law on damages for distress.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I would love to know is whether anyone has gone the small claims route for infringement (failing to supply all the data)...I'm going to start a fresh thread asking this now....

By the way, my former employer asked for a £900 fee to find all emails with my name included in them. I have had a rather tumultuous 11 months since then but am now back on this so will report them to the ICO tomorrow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting,  thanks.

I had read the £750 sentence and it's just right that large organisations pay this kind of money for minor distress, this would in time set a very high compensation rate for serious breaches/infringements.

So banks need to be aware.

I am playing a waiting game.

After the first 30 days, they kept on sending me an email every thursday saying that they will make the rest of the disclosure next week.

This has happened for 4 weeks already.

Of course i submitted a complaint to ICO on day 32 but heard nothing yet.

I sent the company a response to their delaying email saying that all disclosure must be complete without any form of tampering. 

Just to remind, they sent me (by mistake) a few internal emails in which a manager asked to manage me carefully because i could revealed things to other leaseholders and this would be a problem.  He then asks specific questions on how to shut my campaign down, but apparently nobody ever responded.

I asked for these responses and i think now they are modifying them so to cover their wrongdoings. 

But i am confident that they are of such incompetence that they will screw things up for themselves and produce something damning.

In any case as soon as they send anything i will take them to court as they're now out the month statutory timeframe by 4 weeks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had read the £750 sentence and it's just right that large organisations pay this kind of money for minor distress, this would in time set a very high compensation rate for serious breaches/infringements.

So banks need to be aware.

I agree and would never do this to a small organisation that was struggling with the data, but banks, in my opinion, delay deliberately.

 

 

But i am confident that they are of such incompetence that they will screw things up for themselves and produce something damning.

This made me giggle!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You think i'm joking?

I'm not.

These fools sent me a doctored document to prove i was in arrears and using a calculator the balance was nil.

They are a proper bunch of halfwit pompous monkeys.

No surprise they are neighbours to many politicians in an affluent borough (richmond)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I don’t doubt you, I just find it brilliant and amusing.

 

All I’ll add is don’t be too confident they’ll be foolish forever, be prepared for them getting their act together. No harm in being prepared!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will probably take them a decade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Done a couple of these recently where companies have failed to send the DSAR info, the first paid me the £75 and sent the info within days and the second one have paid the £100 i claimed but haven’t yet supplied the info so I haven’t cashed the cheque yet and requested judgement based on them not settling fully. They will rogue that the fee charged has been paid by sending me they cheque but i am happy to go to court and make them explain to a judge why i am claiming damages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent. Good for you!

Interesting to read that the apparent minimum for a breach is £750.....

This from one of my other threads;

 

Take a look at Halliday v Creation Consumer Finance Limited. The claimant was awarded £750 for distress for what the court held to be a minor breach. 

 

https://www.hempsons.co.uk/news-articles/damages-distress-awarded-breach-data-protection-act/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't call that a minimum really.

In that case they messed up quite badly by saying that they didn't know if the data was destroyed or lost.

A minimum standard would be set for a couple of documents disclosed late and i don't think it would be any near the £750.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The court held it to be a minor breach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, jotty said:

Done a couple of these recently where companies have failed to send the DSAR info, the first paid me the £75 and sent the info within days and the second one have paid the £100 i claimed but haven’t yet supplied the info so I haven’t cashed the cheque yet and requested judgement based on them not settling fully. They will rogue that the fee charged has been paid by sending me they cheque but i am happy to go to court and make them explain to a judge why i am claiming damages.

 

I’m intrigued - how did you come to the amounts of £75 and £100, if you don’t mind me asking? 

Cheers.

Edited by craigten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, craigten said:

 

I’m intrigued - how did you come to the amounts of £75 and £100, if you don’t mind me asking? 

Cheers.

They where estimates of the time taken to prepare the requests and then prepare the court papers, much like when they charge me £50 a month in additional admin fees just for pressing send on a keyboard.

 

I could have asked for more but as each company has a cost threshold before they decide to contest I didn't want to incur any further charges by being greedy unlike the companies we have to deal with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Oh I didn’t know that. Any idea what those thresholds are?

Also, what could they contest - the amount you’re claiming for?(as they couldn’t contest that they have infringed GDPR)

Edited by craigten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, craigten said:

Oh I didn’t know that. Any idea what those thresholds are?

Also, what could they contest - the amount you’re claiming for?(as they couldn’t contest that they have infringed GDPR)

The threshold will vary from company to company but I have worked on the estimate of £1000 and less as to instruct a solicitor to defend would cost more than this, but it depends how serious they are and how sure they feel about not giving out info.

 

Its all about putting them on the spot legally to show that their procedures are flawed and how can we be satisfied they are going to adhere to GDPR rules if they cant even supply the info. Not sure how seriously the ICO would take the fact that any company had a ccj based on their non compliance but am certain it would't do any harm to their investigation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I have to say that I feel that without people like you (and hopefully me) to actually make them pay for not adhering, then they will just carry on not respecting either GDPR or the people making the DSARs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s strange - this forum have been great but I did post on another forum about the mere possibility of making a claim against organisations that don’t adhere to the timelines of GDPR or who don’t provide all the data and the heat I got from it was incredible. It’s as if doing what we are doing is frowned upon in some way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We haven't won anything yet, and sadly a lot of people don't know what to look for when they get the documents from the SAR. That's why we all need people like Bankfodder and dx on here.

 

Very important is not to give up and keep asking rather than letting things go as that's what all these companies want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My earlier question went unanswered,  so here it is again:

 

Wouldn't the judge find it unreasonable to take a company to court for £25 without giving them a chance to settle out of court?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...