Tanzarelli V's Barclaycard

[bill-k]

They have also had weeks since the Information Commissioner's raid on them, they would have been aware that the Abbey's microfish system had already been declared relavent and should have made arrangements for rapid compliance with our S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) in the eventuality of their own microfish system also being declared relevant.

 

They made the decision that the Data Protection Act doesnt apply to them and now should pay the price for their arrogance.

 

Agreed !

[TANZARELLI]

They are dictating time scales for their own benefit, again!

 

Take them to court, now, claim for all the damages you have suffered due to their no-compliance. You cant lose.

 

I agree but with you both and thanks, but I still have a few questions.

 

1) how can you quantify the damage caused as this non-compliance?

 

2) How do I go about taking them to court is it under section 13 of the Data Protection Act?

 

3) Do I fill in a N1?

 

4) Is it still under small claims track?

 

5) What goes in POC has anyone else you know of posted examples in threads you have read?

[noomill060]

No idea, sorry.

[bill-k]

1. This is very much an individual calculation, and I think that, unless there is plenty of decent evidence and provenance, it's yet another uphill struggle.

2. If you take them to court solely over this issue, then you are probably going to have to do a lot of soul-searching, as well as web-searching.

3. Probably not - I reckon this would be a solicitor+legal aid job, IMHO.

4. Ditto.

5. There are threads on this, but you will need determination.

 

I personally feel you should bear all this in mind whilst pursuing your current claim. Just take no prisoners, and leave it at that. Go for the max., knowing that you have every good reason so to do !!

 

JMHO, as always !!

[TANZARELLI]

Ok bill,

 

That useful as always, i will work out charges when statement arrive and then go for contractual interest but claim 8% in the alternative. May write another letter to Bcard after I have recieved their letter which should arrive this morning. I will state that their timescale in not acceptable and that I will give them 7 days to comply or I will consider a claim for damages under section 13 of the DPA. This may get them to act a bit faster to send my info.

 

Thanks

 

will keep you posted on developments

 

Tanz

 

P.S. Glad you enjoyed the banana click.

[bill-k]

[TANZARELLI]

Still no letter from Barclaycard (even though the women I spoke to on wednesday said it was sent out Tuesday 1st class), so phoned them up again. Wanted to check which address they sent it to and was informed it was the correct one, the bloke I spoke to said it may be due to the christmas post. I nearly said no its probably due to your incompetence. Will wait and see if it comes tomorrow. However told the bloke that I was not happy having to wait 28 days as the number of days from original SAR was now 102, 62 over the original dealine. The guy said this was due to the backlog. I told him well this is not my problem, you should have made arrangements to strat getting this info following the OFT's ruling on Abbey, and certainly after your visit. He said their stance was that they still did not believe they were in the wrong but as the OFT had made a ruling on their system they were actually doing what I had suggested they should have done by supplying the info. I got a bit angry then and told him that I expect this to be resolved within 7 days or I would consider making a claim under section 13 of the DPA for damages. I also said that I wanted this to be recoreded on my file.

 

I also think another letter is also needed to clarify my position. This is yet another case of them trying to stall this. If they then try to use the 6 year rule arguement for my claim, I will have a few things to say about this.

 

I am definately going contractual on this baby, and i have every intentio of using the 27.9% rate. Bill if your reading this, we'll need to discuss at a mutually convenient time. Theres a banana in it for you.

 

Tanz

[bill-k]

Look forward to it,Tanz !!

 

Ask away - I'll be back later tonite, I hope.

[TANZARELLI]

deadsquirel just posted this in the Barclaycard microfiche they're wrong thread. Its exactly what the guy from Barclaycard read out to me over the phone when i rang wed:

 

"Dear ....

I write further to your recent letter regarding your request for copy statements.

 

As you are aware the Information Commissioners Office is likely to revise its guidance on non-computerised filing systems and believes that our microfiche records are held on a relevant filing system. Although Barclaycard reserves its position on this matter, as a goodwill gesture I have requested the statements you require from our National Records Centre. You will receive this information within 28 days. Please accept my apologies for the delay.

 

Our position not to provide these documents further to your earlier Subject Access Request was taken as the Information Commissioners Office had previously felt that most manual records fell outside of the definition of personal data. It now appears that their interpretation of what constitutes a relevant filing system is likely to change and they intend to publish new guidance on this in the near future.

 

Should you have any further questions regarding this matter please do not hesitate to contact me. If my reply does not meet with your expectations you may ultimately be eligable to refer to the Financial Ombudsman Service. Further details ofthis service are available, blah blah blah"

 

Obviously withouut the blah blah blah bit. Looks like they have contraucted another templated response to try and fob us off.

 

Bookworm suggested to write another letter, as I had also said I will be doing. I will send one off tomorrow, as will have the time as not working because its my birthday, well actually in 15 mins it is. "Happy birthday to me, your having it Barclays, you must think we're all numpties, well believe me you'll see" I'm going to enjoy this one more than the last.

 

Will post the draft letter in the morning as a bit knackered after work and now enjoying a nice cold beer.

 

Tanz

[bill-k]

Yeah - enjoy, mate !!

 

Happy Birthday to ya !!

 

PS - love the rhyme !!!

[TANZARELLI]

Thanks Bill.

 

Just drafted a bit of a letter to clarify a few points with Bcard. Any thoughts welcomed.

 

Data Protection Team

Department LRC

Barclaycard

Northampton

NN475G

15th December 2006

Account Number: **** **** **** ****

Dear Sirs,

Following my recent telephone conversations with your organisation I felt it necessary to clarify my position with you.

During the first telephone on 13th December 2006, I was informed by one of your customer account advisors that a letter had been posted to me, first class delivery on the 12th December 2006. I was also informed that the contents of this letter stated that you would be, even if already extremely overdue, be supplying me with all of the information that I requested you supply me in my original Subject Access Request (SAR), but that this would take 28 days to get to me, also that this is as a gesture of good will.

I feel that a few points need to be brought to your attention.

1) My original SAR was dated 3rd September 2003. The original information, which I requested should have been supplied, within 40 days. As a result Barclaycard has, I believe, contravened the sixth data protection principle, as this requires data controllers to process personal data in accordance with data subjects' rights. May I point out that as of today’s date it has been 103 days since I submitted my SAR request to you, which if you do the maths, is 63 days in which you’ve had over and above the original request deadline. May I also point out that, on the 21/11/06 a Royal Bank of Scotland customer was granted a County Court order in respect of the failure by the Royal Bank of Scotland to comply with his disclosure request under the Data Protection Act. District judge Forrester, making the order commented that had the claimant been able to supply him with the name of the data controller at the Royal Bank of Scotland that he would have added a threat of imprisonment for non-compliance. I suggest you consider your failure to comply carefully, and I require this information to be sent to me within 7 days of the date of this letter. Should there be any further attempts to delay compliance, I will be left with no alternative but to commence a County Court action under section 7, and section 15(2) of the Data Protection Act 1998.

2) It is now 15th December and I still have yet to receive your letter, which you informed me was sent out 1st class delivery on the 12th December 2006. Even with the Christmas post I feel this should have been with me by now. I received a letter from another bank this morning sent 1st class which was also dated 12th December, so this would suggest; you have not sent this and are again deliberately trying to stall this matter further. I suggest you re-send your response letter dated 12th December, immediately.

3) When I phoned your organization on 14th one of your customer account managers read the above mentioned letter out to me. He said referring to the recent decision by the Information Commissioners Office that Barclaycards Microfiche system is a relevant filing system “Although Barclaycard reserves its position on this matter, as a goodwill gesture I have requested the statements you require from our National Records Centre. You will receive this information within 28 days. Please accept my apologies for the delay.” I must say that I find this patronising to say the least. It is blatantly obvious to me that you are deliberately trying every possible thing you can to stall this matter, so that you can try to decrease the number of charges in which customers should be able to claim, in respect of the Limitation Act 1980. This will have no bearing on my future claim and you should be aware of Section 32 of this Act, which gives relief to claimants.

I hope this clarifies my position.

Yours sincerely,

Tanz

[bill-k]

Wow- that's a knockout, I reckon, Tanz !!

 

Apart from clearing up a few typos before you print it, I wouldn't consider myself worthy of suggesting any changes to the masterpiece.

 

One thing I'm thinking which might be worth considering, though. I see you've mentioned that "imprisonment" case. Is it worth trying to find the name of the Chief Data Control Officer there, or at least some individual. Then address the letter to them personally. I think it might that extra threat of imprisonment to it, then.

 

Just a thought though.

 

Hit 'em with it.

[TANZARELLI]

Thanks Bill will go over it prior to sending (rec del today).

 

I will also add F.A.O The Data Controller, whose name incidentally I have just been told by Barclaycard Customer Relations, is:

 

Mr Adrian Whalley (I would also say that this is pronounced wally)

 

How apt!!!!!!!! lol

 

Tanz

[TANZARELLI]

Hows that look ok I think,

 

Let me know if you see any more typos?

 

[My Name]

[My Address]

……………………..

Mr Adrian Whalley -The Data Protection Manager

Data Protection Team

Department LRC

Barclaycard

Northampton

NN475G

15th December 2006

Account Number: **** **** **** ****

Dear Adrian Whalley,

Following my recent telephone conversations with your organisation I felt it necessary to clarify my position with you.

During the first telephone on 13th December 2006, I was informed by one of your customer account advisors that a letter had been posted to me, first class delivery on the 12th December 2006. I was also informed that the contents of this letter stated that you would be, even if already extremely overdue, supplying me with all of the information which I requested you supply in my original Subject Access Request (SAR), but that this would take 28 days to get to me, also that this is as a gesture of good will.

I feel that a few points need to be brought to your attention.

1) My original SAR was dated 3rd September 2003. The original information which I requested should have been supplied within 40 days. As a result Barclaycard has, I believe contravened the sixth data protection principle, as this requires data controllers to process personal data in accordance with data subjects' rights. May I point out that as of today’s date it has been 103 days since I submitted my SAR request to you, which if you do the maths, is 63 days in which you’ve had over and above the original request deadline. May I also point out that, on the 21/11/06 a Royal Bank of Scotland customer was granted a County Court order in respect of the failure by the Royal Bank of Scotland to comply with his disclosure request under the Data Protection Act. District judge Forrester, making the order commented that had the claimant been able to supply him with the name of the data controller at the Royal Bank of Scotland that he would have added a threat of imprisonment for non-compliance. I suggest you consider your failure to comply carefully, and I require this information to be sent to me within 7 days of the date of this letter. Should there be any further attempts to delay compliance, I will be left with no alternative but to commence a County Court action under section 7, and section 15(2) of the Data Protection Act 1998.

2) It is now 15th December and I still have yet to receive your letter, which you informed me was sent out 1st class delivery on the 12th December 2006. Even with the Christmas post I feel this should have been with me by now. I received a letter from another bank this morning sent 1st class which was also dated 12th December, so this would suggest; you have not sent this and are again deliberately trying to stall this matter further. I suggest you re-send your response letter dated 12th December, immediately.

3) When I phoned your organization on 14th one of your customer account managers read the above mentioned letter out to me. He said referring to the recent decision by the Information Commissioners Office that Barclaycards Microfiche system is a relevant filing system “Although Barclaycard reserves its position on this matter, as a goodwill gesture I have requested the statements you require from our National Records Centre. You will receive this information within 28 days. Please accept my apologies for the delay.” I must say that I find this patronising to say the least. It is blatantly obvious to me that you are deliberately trying every possible thing you can to stall this matter, so that you can try to decrease the number of charges in which customers should be able to claim, in respect of the Limitation Act 1980. This will have no bearing on my future claim and you should be aware of Section 32 of this Act, which gives relief to claimants.

I hope this clarifies my position.

Yours sincerely,

Tanz

[bill-k]

Hows that look ok I think,

 

Let me know if you see any more typos?

 

[My Name]

[My Address]

……………………..

 

Mr Adrian Whalley -The Data Protection Manager

Data Protection Team [delete]

Department LRC

Barclaycard

Northampton

NN475G [add space]

 

15th December 2006

 

Account Number: **** **** **** ****

 

 

Dear [Mr] Whalley,

 

 

Following my recent telephone conversations with your organisation I felt it necessary to clarify my position with you.

 

During the first telephone [conversation] on 13th December 2006, I was informed by one of your customer account advisors that a letter had been posted to me, first class delivery on the 12th December 2006. I was also informed that the contents of this letter stated that you would be, even if already extremely overdue, supplying me with all of the information which I requested you supply in my original Subject Access Request (S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)), but that this would take 28 days to get to me, also that this is as a gesture of good will.

 

I feel that a few points need to be brought to your attention.

 

1) My original SAR was dated 3rd September 2003. The original information which I requested should have been supplied within 40 days. As a result Barclaycard has, I believe contravened the sixth data protection principle, as this requires data controllers to process personal data in accordance with data subjects' rights. May I point out that as of today’s date it has been 103 days since I submitted my SAR request to you, which if you do the maths, is 63 days in which you’ve had over and above the original request deadline. May I also point out that, on the 21/11/06 a Royal Bank of Scotland customer was []granted a County Court order in respect of the failure by the Royal Bank of Scotland to comply with his disclosure request under the Data Protection Act. District judge Forrester, making the order commented that had the claimant been able to supply him with the name of the data controller at the Royal Bank of Scotland that he would have added a threat of imprisonment for non-compliance. I suggest you consider your failure to comply carefully, and I require this information to be sent to me within 7 days of the date of this letter. []Should there be any further attempts to delay compliance, I will be left with no alternative but to commence a County Court action under section 7, and section 15(2) of the Data Protection Act 1998.

2) It is now 15th December and I still have yet to receive your letter, which you informed me was sent out 1st class delivery on the 12th December 2006. Even with the Christmas post I feel this should have been with me by now. I received a letter from another bank this morning sent 1st class which was also dated 12th December, so this would suggest; you have not sent this and are again deliberately trying to stall this matter further. I suggest you re-send your response letter dated 12th December, immediately.

3) When I phoned your organization on 14th one of your customer account managers read the above mentioned letter out to me. He said referring to the recent decision by the Information Commissioners Office that Barclaycards Microfiche system is a relevant filing system “Although Barclaycard reserves its position on this matter, as a goodwill gesture I have requested the statements you require from our National Records Centre. You will receive this information within 28 days. Please accept my apologies for the delay.” I must say that I find this patronising to say the least. It is blatantly obvious to me that you are deliberately trying every possible thing you can to stall this matter, so that you can try to decrease the number of charges in which customers should be able to claim, in respect of the Limitation Act 1980. This will have no bearing on my future claim and you should be aware of Section 32 of this Act, which gives relief to claimants.

 

I hope this clarifies my position.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Tanz

 

Thanks for the invite, Tanz !! I just pointed to a few - not important, though.

Yeah - print & send ASAP.

Well done for finding Adrian Whalley's name, too. It just had to be summat like that, didn't it ?

Or perhaps Wayne Kerr !!

[TANZARELLI]

Thanks Bill,

 

All done. Sent yesterday.

 

Like the new Avatar by the way. Very festive.

 

Tanz

[bill-k]

Good, Tanz. Just wait & see, now, then.

 

People are putting up festive avatars, so I thought I'd have a go, thanks !!

[deadsquirrel]

deadsquirel just posted this in the Barclaycard microfiche they're wrong thread. Its exactly what the guy from Barclaycard read out to me over the phone when i rang wed:

 

"Dear ....

I write further to your recent letter regarding your request for copy statements.

 

As you are aware the Information Commissioners Office is likely to revise its guidance on non-computerised filing systems and believes that our microfiche records are held on a relevant filing system. Although Barclaycard reserves its position on this matter, as a goodwill gesture I have requested the statements you require from our National Records Centre. You will receive this information within 28 days. Please accept my apologies for the delay.

 

Our position not to provide these documents further to your earlier Subject Access Request was taken as the Information Commissioners Office had previously felt that most manual records fell outside of the definition of personal data. It now appears that their interpretation of what constitutes a relevant filing system is likely to change and they intend to publish new guidance on this in the near future.

 

Should you have any further questions regarding this matter please do not hesitate to contact me. If my reply does not meet with your expectations you may ultimately be eligable to refer to the Financial Ombudsman Service. Further details ofthis service are available, blah blah blah"

 

Obviously withouut the blah blah blah bit. Looks like they have contraucted another templated response to try and fob us off.

 

Bookworm suggested to write another letter, as I had also said I will be doing. I will send one off tomorrow, as will have the time as not working because its my birthday, well actually in 15 mins it is. "Happy birthday to me, your having it Barclays, you must think we're all numpties, well believe me you'll see" I'm going to enjoy this one more than the last.

 

Will post the draft letter in the morning as a bit knackered after work and now enjoying a nice cold beer.

 

Tanz

 

happy Birthday!

 

i sent a response to the above letter confirming that I would start a claim for enforcement of the SAR AND compensation on the 10th Jan 2007 (the 29th day from the above letter being received) without further recourse to Bcard. I DID have a copy statement sheet for June 2004 from them today - talk about rubbish!

[TANZARELLI]

What they just sent you one statement for June 2004?

 

Cheek of em. What do your letter say?

 

Tanz

[TANZARELLI]

eye eye!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[deadsquirrel]

What they just sent you one statement for June 2004?

 

Cheek of em. What do your letter say?

 

Tanz

something like - ' here's part of your request, remainder to follow...'. Very much seems like something they can use to claim partial compliance in the future

[TANZARELLI]

something like - ' here's part of your request, remainder to follow...'. Very much seems like something they can use to claim partial compliance in the future

 

 

I'd send them another letter. Try using the one I posted in #39 and adapt it to suit. They should not set the timescale. They don't half klnow how to wind you up don't they arrogance of them if unbelievable.

 

Tanz

[bill-k]

That eyeball is SCARY, Tanz !!!! :o

 

I'm not sure if there is such a thing as partial compliance. Either they supply everything that you are entitled to or they don't. If one single item is missing, then that's non-compliance in my book.

 

Have you heard anything back from the ICO, yet ?

[TANZARELLI]

No eye haven't!!!!!!!

 

Will call them tomorrow. I know whats in letter but just need it for the file.

 

Will keep you posted.

 

Tanz

[TANZARELLI]

Well finally received my response to the complaint which I had put into the ICO. Same letter that has been posted by others in other posts, also recieved back my supplimentary info which i sent to them.

 

In addition to this I had the letter from Barclaycard dated 12 December 2006.

 

It said the following:

 

I write further to your recent letter regarding your request for copy statements. This is the letter which has took 6 days to get to me 1st class, also which I have already responded to as knew what its content was as was informed over the phone. My response was sent on 15th Dec, see above)

 

As you are aware the ICO is likely to revise its guidance on non computerised filing systems and believes that our microfiche records are held on a relevant filing system. Although Barclaycard reserves its position on this matter, as a goodwill gesture I have requested the statements you require from our National Records Centre. You will recieve this information within 28 days. Please accept my appologies for the delay. (Well we'll see what you have to say to my response)

 

Our position not to provide these documents further to your earlier Subject Access Request was taken as the ICO had previously felt that most manual records fell out outside of the definition of personal data. (don't try and pass the buck) It now appears tha their interpretation of what constitutes a relevant filing system is likely to change and they intend to publish new guidance on this in the near future.

 

Should you have any further questions regarding this matter please don't hesitate to contact me. If my reply does not meet with your expectations you may ultimately be eligible to refer to the Financial Ombudsman Service. Further details are available on request. If I have not heard from you within 8 weeks from the date of this letter, I will close my file in accordance with our usual practice. (I wouldn't close it yet, as you will definately hear from me and it wil be with a claim for repayment of charges and contractual interest at 27.9%)

Yours sincerely

 

Carl Nuttall

Customer Relationship Manager (well your not managing this relationship to well are you?)

They have until friday to sort this or I am going to start an action against them.

Tanz