Virgin, mystery extra line: 2 judgments for Data Protection breaches - so far!!

[BankFodder]

Of course, the warrant will be requested to execute for the judgement sum and the claim costs as well as the cost of execution.

[lemon_martini2]

Just a quick update to keep everyone informed-I received confirmation today that 

 

a)Warrant on 1st unpaid claim has issued on 18/1 and sent for execution to Sunderland County Court

(the nearest one to Virgin's complaints address)

b)2nd claim issued on 18/1, will be deemed served on 23/1 and Virgin has until 6/2 to reply.

 

SAR remains outstanding as it has not been properly and fully supplied and I have heard nothing from Virgin since 8/1.

 

[BankFodder]

Thanks. The outstanding SAR is the one which relates to the second claim – is that correct?

Did you send off a third SAR – specific to the mystery telephone number?

[lemon_martini2]

Yes-the outstanding SAR is for the second(and first) claims. The third SAR for the mystery number was sent on 11/1 and so far no reply.

[BankFodder]

Okay. I was losing track. Thanks

I'm intrigued to know what their reaction is going to be when they eventually get visited by the bailiffs – although I have to say that County Court bailiffs are pussycats compared to High Court enforcement officers

[BankFodder]

I think you could usefully telephone the Sunderland County Court during the week – maybe Wednesday to find out the progress of the warrant and what date they imagine that they are going to go round and execute it.
They might also tell you whether they are preparing to make a visit or whether they are going to do it by letter initially.

This kind of information is available – because about 10 years or so ago, we sent the bailiffs into the Royal Bank of Scotland in Camden Town and we managed to get the data in advance and we had the press waiting to report.

 

Quote

A man who was fed up with paying massive bank charges decided to give one of the high street giants a taste of its own medicine.

When Royal Bank of Scotland refused to refund £3,400 charges that Declan Purcell believed he was owed, he sent in the bailiffs.

Stunned customers at his branch of RBS watched as debt collectors seized four computers, two fax machines and a till filled with cash.

 

The branch manager was told that the items would be sold unless RBS came up with the money owed to Mr Purcell.

 

Only when the manager gave an undertaking that the debt would be paid did the bailiffs leave.

Mr Purcell said: "I think the bank was pretty shocked when the bailiffs went in. But my view is that this is exactly what they would have done to me."

The move, which will raise a cheer from millions of other bank customers, is part of a consumer fightback against bank charges, which net an estimated £4.5 billion every year.

Every time a current account customer goes overdrawn by as little as £1 most banks will charge around £28, even though the administration cost is only about £4.50.

Then every cheque, direct debit, or card transaction that goes through or is bounced incurs another charge of up to £38.

The Office of Fair Trading is investigating whether banks have implemented these charges unlawfully.

The Daily Mail's Fair Play on Charges campaign and that run by the Consumer Action Group have helped thousands reclaim charges in the past year.

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/customer-sends-bailiffs-in-to-seize-bank-s-computers-7197321.html

oh how we laughed

 

 

[lemon_martini2]

Well, as Judge Judy would say-they don't know if they're afoot or horseback.

 

Virgin called this morning with a new bod(Paul at the Executive Office) who has taken over dealing with my complaint.

 

* He wanted to check that as my complaint was about a SAR and as this information now been received, was I satisfied for him to mark it as resolved and close the complaint? Definitely not.

 

*He stated that what I had received on 24/12was everything they had.If they had not sent it,they did not have it and so they had fulfilled the request's demands to supply 'everything they had'.

 

*He stated he would put in one more request,but it was extremely likely all I would receive was exactly the same as was sent on 24/12. After that, further requests would be refused and the complaint would be closed. If I was unhappy with this, I would have to take it up with the Financial Ombudsman.

 

Here's where we have an interesting twist:

*He asked whether I had accepted Stuart's offer of 6/12 for £500 (composed of £204[handset],£18[money taken out],£25[cost of the claim],£200[value of the claim] and the remaining £53[compensation]).

 

-If I accepted it, the £500 would be credited to my bank account. From that I would then have to pay back the £204 for the handset and the £18 repayment of money paid back, leaving me with just £278.Until the money was paid back,it would be passed onto a debt collection agency and continue to show on my credit file as an outstanding debt.

-If I rejected it, the complaint would be closed immediately.

 

As this would be significantly altering the offer, I demanded that if that is Virgin's amended offer, that it be put in writing immediately. 

 

Also according to him, there was no further notes or action to be taken this complaint-meaning that they appear to be in blissful ignorance that they have one claim currently being processed and  one that has had a CCJ issued and bailiffs instructed to pursue it. I certainly am not about to enlighten them.

 

 

[BankFodder]

Amazing. He called on a Sunday?

Also I would refuse to accept any deal where it falls to you to repay the cost of the handset. The handset has nothing to do with you. You have no obligation towards that account whatsoever.

If they are really saying that they have got no more data relating to you then we are getting closer to a checkmate situation for them.

What they are in effect saying is that anything relating to the handset is not your data and you are not entitled to it. Hopefully that will be confirmed when they respond to the SAR which specifically addresses the handset account.

In terms of refusing further requests, as the request has never been satisfied then these are not further requests. They are simply continuing the reminders of the initial request.

The only one which is a separate/discrete request is the one which specifically addresses the handset account

[lemon_martini2]

I have been in touch with Sunderland County Court- Virgin have ignored two demand letters from and the third and final one has been sent(seems rather generous of them to give them three chances...)

If there is no reply,bailiffs will be sent in on 3 February.

 

The second claim will become due on 6 February-if I get a judgment on that I will get the bailiffs straight onto that one too. Do you know if the court  can combine the judgments into one amount for the bailiffs or if they have to be executed separately?

[BankFodder]

I don't know if they can be combined and it is an interesting question because if we could eventually combined. judgements to a sum of greater than £600 then you could put the sheriff's in and that's where you are in for some very serious enforcement

apart from that, my preference would be for separate enforcement so that you have a sort of drip drip death by a thousand cuts approach

 

After all it's not really about the money. It's really about waking them up and giving them a good shake

[BankFodder]

enforcement by sheriff's is a no-nonsense approach. No excuses. No warnings. And the cost of enforcement are typically £2,000 to be borne by the defendant

[AndyOrch]

Concurrent warrants

 

83.29 Two or more warrants of control may be issued concurrently for execution by two or more different enforcement agents, but—

(a) no more may be levied under all the warrants together than is authorised to be levied under one of them; and

(b) unless the court orders otherwise, the costs of more than one warrant will not be allowed against the debtor.

 

(6) If because of one event, an applicant seeks permission under paragraph (3)(b) to enforce more than one judgment or order, the applicant need only make one application for permission.

 

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part-83-writs-and-warrants-general-provisions

 

Andy

[BankFodder]

Oh well that puts an end to the idea of the sheriffs.

May as well stick to the idea of getting them enforced separately

 

 

[BankFodder]

I must say that I'm finding this claim rather frustrating.

I really imagined that once virgin received a threat of legal action the first time, that they would wake up and start to sort it out and then once it was sorted out we would simply examine what the whole farce had cost and then begin a claim for compensation.

When that didn't happen, I really thought that when the claim papers were issued they would wake up and start to take it seriously.
That didn't happen.

Now apparently they've had to bailiff letters and they still haven't reacted. They also had another claim and they still haven't reacted – with another four days to go.
They also had another SAR targeted specifically at the phantom telephone account – and which has a return date coming up – although I can't remember what the date is – and they still haven't responded to that.

It's quite extraordinary and somebody virgin really wants kicking. In fact it's the senior management the wants kicking because clearly they haven't bothered to set up proper systems or to put proper staff development in place so that people understand the seriousness of what's going on.

When is the return date for this last SAR?

[lemon_martini2]

I was awaiting something too...they promised to send a form for Alternative Dispute Resolution. Perhaps it's spending lockdown in a box that no-one can get to as it certainly hasnt appeared here.

The timeline is:

Wed 3 Feb Bailiffs to be sent in if no reply(!)

Sat 6 Feb Judgment can be obtained on second claim if no reply

Thu 11 Feb 1 month time frame on SAR request for second handset becomes due.

 

It says something about their laxity that seemingly no-one has noticed that they have one CCJ that has not been paid and one due for judgment or taken any notice of letters sent by a Crown Court...

[BankFodder]

Assuming you get the judgement and then go ahead to enforce it, I can imagine when they finally wake up and we start talking about compensation for the damage they caused, they will try to say that you've already had £400.

They will have difficulty appreciating that the £400 simply for repeated SAR breaches and have nothing to do with the substantive problem.

Also, if they are offering you some internal ADR procedure then I think the answer has to be – no.

The only thing that counts for these people is that they are subject to court procedure.

[lemon_martini2]

I've just spoken to Sunderland Crown Court-if nothing is heard by tomorrow(and they haven't replied to three letters from the Crown Court and two from the warrant hub) then the bailiffs go in

 The only problem they have intimated at is that they may not be able to go into the premises(especially if it's a business) because of Covid, but I shall leave that for them to sort out themselves.

I wonder if having the bailiffs come in on  one warrant will jog someone's brain to check and make sure that there's no

more outstanding ones coming up that should be dealt with!

[BankFodder]

It it wouldn't at all surprise me if they didn't make the connection at all.

I'm wondering what to do if they don't respond to the third SAR. You could begin a claim for more money – and this time make it something much more substantial, or else use a Part 8 procedure which would eventually force them by means of a court order to produce the personal data you are seeking.
The only trouble with that is that if something went wrong, there would be a question of costs because the normal rules for small claims would not apply.

[lemon_martini2]

Email from Virgin today- they have received the SAR(for the mystery handset)on 1/2 and will respond to it within one

month. Since it was sent to them on 11/1, that's almost a three-week gap.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if they have just realized it will nearly be expired and have claimed just to have got it in order to buy more time .

[BankFodder]

I would suggest that you email them immediately and point out to them the date that it was sent to them and that the SAR was effective from XXX date (two days after you sent it) and that the statutory date for disclosure is XXX date and that if they do not comply by that date then you will be embarking on the pre-action protocol and send them a letter of claim

And on the other one, isn't today the day of judgement day?

[lemon_martini2]

First CCJ remains unpaid-as of yesterday it is now in the hands of Sunderland Crown Court bailiffs.

Second claim remains unpaid-on 6/2 I shall be able to get a judgment on it if no reply.

 

So if no reply by Saturday they will have racked up two unpaid CCJ's and still not complied with the SAR request.

[BankFodder]

Thanks. Last time we deliberately waited for 30 days to make sure that the CC J was registered against them. This time, – and because the bailiffs seem to take so long, I would suggest that you give it say, about seven days after you actually receive the judgement – and then put the bailiffs in.

Virgin might wake up and pay – but in the event that they don't, then it is on likely that the bailiffs will have enforced before the expiry of 30 days and so that judgement will be registered against them anyway.

It will be interesting to see how they respond to your latest SAR.

Three scenarios –

• the first one is that they provide all information which explains the entire story and their mistake so that we can then start to take action to sort it out.
• The second one is that they may respond and say that they have no data on this at all – and once again that then opens the door for action.
• The third one – and maybe the most delicious – is that they reply to you and say that you are not the data subject in question and therefore they are not permitted to provide you with this information.

[lemon_martini2]

I can also see two more scenarios which given their performance so far seem very likely:

• They reply and state that they have already supplied all the information for this
• They simply don't bother to reply at all.

Presumably in either of these cases, we then tailor the action we take accordingly.

[BankFodder]

Well your first proposed scenario is really equivalent to the second possibility which I suggested – and that they say they don't have any data because if they say that they have already supplied everything, then that means that they got no record of you at all starting up this phantom contract.
That I then think gives you the cause to go ahead and attack them on the basis of inaccurate data processing and that they have opened up an account in your name and build you et cetera et cetera et cetera and caused you damage.

Your second proposal – that they do reply at all – would certainly be interesting but it seems unlikely in view of the fact that they have now acknowledged and they appear to know what it is that they've received.


 

Was this most recent acknowledgement of the SAR from a different department?

[lemon_martini2]

This latest acknowledgment is just from the 'Web Team' whoever they might be...