Barclays breach of the Data Protection Act

[kfdh1962]

was jsut about to let you know its in the templates library, but see you have found it already!

I ahve had to do the same thing with halifax, take court action for failure to comply.

The particulars of the claim for this are also in there

[jimmyay]

any idea how long it takes to get an order or your money under one of these DPA claims?

[kfdh1962]

not really sure, i have only seen this a couple of times. As i understand it the main objective is to force compliance with the SAR, so that we can review our charges and then follow the normal time frame as it were. Within the claim the judge has the opprotunity to award discretionary damages.

If i recall, on one thread i saw i think the judge gave them something like two weeks to comply, and said that if he knew the name of the Data controller he would have jailed him, and if they didnt comply with his order he would find out the name of this person and do exactly that!!

Maybe someone else has more of an idea on this, looking for some help myself on what i need to do next as notice has been served now to the hellifax and they have until the 9th to respond.

[jimmyay]

Thanks for that. it seems there are a few of us ready to act on DPA non disclosure within the 40 day limit.

 

I guess naming Peter Townsend as the data controller of Barclays Bank would focus the judge's mind, given that he has the power to jail for non compliance.

[Bicester1]

Hi

 

Absolutely. If the District Judge were to be made aware IMHO then he may well act as the DG did with RBS. This is just another example of Barclays abuse of process. Their arrgance is unbounded!

 

Bicester1

[Redmountie999]

Sorry to jump the thread but can do you guys know if they Barclays would have to disclosed a default notice sent to me under S.87 Consumer Credit Act in 2001. I've sent them an S.A.R. just for this specific piece of information but they are still refusing to supply it.

[davecool]

Hi

 

First TIme poster here......

 

Sent my letter for S A R on 15/02/07

 

Got a reply back today saying that they will not carry out my request...

 

What do i do now????

 

Thanks

[jimmyay]

I think you have to threaten court - 7 day letter - was it a blank refusal?

[noomill060]

What does the refusal letter actually say?

 

Could you print out the precise words?

[davecool]

Actually, I read the letter too quick and they has put aside my request for a schedule of charges , but are sending me copy statements"within the next few weeks", They go on to say that statement info beofre 2000 is stored manaully and have said they may be a increase in the time required to collate.

 

Sorry if i caused confusion....

 

Do they still have to get my statements to me within 40 days ?

 

Thanks

 

DAVE

[noomill060]

They have to everything you asked for to you within 40 days.

[Will Scarlet]

Davecool - make sure you're accurate in future. Mistakes can be costly in this game. Read all letters thoroughly (they're mostly hot air) and ensure all correspondance from you is accurate & complete. If you follow those simple rules of thumb and the guidance on the site you'll be fine. Good luck.

[davecool]

Will Scarlett

 

Thanks for the advice. Will make sure in future that I don't just write something in this forum without knowing all the facts.

 

Thanks

 

DAVECOOL:cool: :cool:

[sleepydog]

Hello everyone, we're new to all of this and have just started with Barclays. We sent our first letter (SRA letter) last Friday 16th and today received the first reply stating that they are under no obligation to present information according to any particular format. Therefore, your request to assemble a schedule of charges is turned aside. However they will supplycopy statements and on this occasion free of charge, blah, blah, blah. The bit we are unclear about is about 'Manual intervention'. It states that the DPA does not oblige the bank to comment about internal policies and procedures. blah, blah, the bank does not hold the information you have requested in a form that would be covered by the DPA. Help, it then carries on to say 'for the avoidance of doubt, the fact that we do not generally record information in a way that is caught by the provisions of the DPA, is in no way an admission that there was no such manual intervantion. HELP, please can anyone suggest what we should do not. We assume that the statement bit is ok but assume they are fobbing us off about the 'manual intervention'? Any offers of letters to send next etc.

Getting desperate already!

[adrian1972]

Hello everyone, we're new to all of this and have just started with Barclays. We sent our first letter (SRA letter) last Friday 16th and today received the first reply stating that they are under no obligation to present information according to any particular format. Therefore, your request to assemble a schedule of charges is turned aside. However they will supplycopy statements and on this occasion free of charge, blah, blah, blah. The bit we are unclear about is about 'Manual intervention'. It states that the Data Protection Act does not oblige the bank to comment about internal policies and procedures. blah, blah, the bank does not hold the information you have requested in a form that would be covered by the DPA. Help, it then carries on to say 'for the avoidance of doubt, the fact that we do not generally record information in a way that is caught by the provisions of the DPA, is in no way an admission that there was no such manual intervantion. HELP, please can anyone suggest what we should do not. We assume that the statement bit is ok but assume they are fobbing us off about the 'manual intervention'? Any offers of letters to send next etc.

Getting desperate already!

 

Hi sleepy,

 

I'm waiting for my statements to arrive and got the same letter as you, and after looking through all of the other threads so did everyone else, its just standard bull**** as far as i can see. So i wouldnt worry

 

Adrian

[jimmyay]

i had reply from info commisioner last week saying Baclaycard have 28 days now to resond, well about 21 days now!

 

if they dont then i will feel comfortable giving 7 days then go to court.

[kfdh1962]

i reported halifax for the same reason. i sent in an SAR in september and they still haven't complied. The information comissioner eventually concluded that they were in breach of one the 8 principles of the data protection act, but that this in its self is not a criminal act and they cannot punish an organisation for such a breach. They basically went on to say they can slap their wrist and tell them to deal with as a matter of prioroty but thats it. The info commisioner also mentioned the heavy workload that the banks are under with all of the claims facing them (what a shame) although this in no excuse for failure to comply. And the letter then went on to mention taking court action for failure to comply, which is what i have done.

Halifax have to file their defence by today. So dont hold out much hope re the info comissioner, you will probably have to go the court route.

[vanboy]

My experience with Barclays and getting info from them has been totally different: 12/02/07 sent letter requesting details of all penalty charges levied on my account for the last 6 years - 21/02/07 recieved full bank copys of old statements in full and accompanied with,surprisingly,a very nice letter explaining the layout of these statements and offering help should i need to ask any questions??.Obviously Barclays know what my intentions are - nearly £1500 of intention i found after adding all the penalty charges up,i just find it strange after reading these particular threads.Also,on the C.A.G template letter for actually claiming penalty charges back there is a bit which mentions claiming back "overdraft interest",i may be being a bit thick but does this mean claiming back ALL of the interest the bank have charged on the overdraft?.Thanks.

[dickeggsy]

no.

you can claim back either statutary 8% interest at court stage on all of your charges which means 8% on each charge going back to whatever date the charge was debited or you can claim contractual interest which means you claim back the interest that they added onto the charge at the time the charge was debited , which is harder to work out but there are spreadsheets for both methods.

overdraft interest is what they are legally entitled to debit from your account (but seeing as the charges are illegal you can claim it back.)

most people opt for the statutary 8% to save the hassle.

i hope that's clear lol.

[Trucker]

My experience with Barclays and getting info from them has been totally different: 12/02/07 sent letter requesting details of all penalty charges levied on my account for the last 6 years - 21/02/07 recieved full bank copys of old statements in full and accompanied with,surprisingly,a very nice letter explaining the layout of these statements and offering help should i need to ask any questions??.Obviously Barclays know what my intentions are - nearly £1500 of intention i found after adding all the penalty charges up,i just find it strange after reading these particular threads.Also,on the C.A.G template letter for actually claiming penalty charges back there is a bit which mentions claiming back "overdraft interest",i may be being a bit thick but does this mean claiming back ALL of the interest the bank have charged on the overdraft?.Thanks.

 

Just as a matter of interest, to whom and where did you send your SAR letter to. I am about to post mine, but will wait for reply to make sure.

[vanboy]

Thanks for that info.I sent my initial letter requesting details of all the penalty charges to the Manager at my local branch,this perhaps may be the reason i've had no real hassle so far.I would imagine if you send your initial letter to Leicester head office they may be slightly less willing to help.Thanks.

[Trucker]

Thank vanboy. As i have used the DPA template think i may well send it to warrington

[dunnie1]

It appears that barclays have not been found in breach of their data protection obligations.(only barlcaycard which is unrelated according to the following). read the following email from the Information commissioners office I recieved today.

3rd March 2007

 

Reference ENQ0144493

 

Dear Mr Dunleavy

 

Thank you for your email dated 8 December 2006 regarding Barclays Bank. I apologise for the delay in my response, however we currently have a significant backlog of cases awaiting attention.

 

I understand from your correspondence that it has come to your attention that Barclays has been found by the Information Commissioner to be in breach of their data protection obligations. You have requested further information regarding this.

 

Unfortunately I feel you may have been misinformed with regards to Barclays as we have not made any rulings against them that I am aware of.

 

If, as I suspect, you are talking about our recent decision regarding subject access regarding Barclaycard I should point out that Barclays and Barclaycard are entirely separate legal entities and as such any decisions regarding Barclaycard have nothing to do with Barclays Bank.

 

If you are interested in our position regarding the storage of bank statements on a microfiche system at Barclaycard I have outlined our position below. If this is not the information you were looking for I apologise.

 

It may first be helpful to clarify that although the information contained within your bank statements, such as details of transactions, is considered to be personal data under the Act so must be supplied in response to a SAR, the Act simply states that personal data must be supplied in an ‘intelligible form’. This means that the information you have requested must be provided if it is held as personal data, but not necessarily in its original format i.e. as a bank statement.

 

As you may be aware, the Act only applies to ‘personal data’ i.e. information which is processed electronically and which relates to a living, identifiable individual. Information which is held in some manual (non-computerised) records can also be personal data for the purposes of the Act if it is stored in what is known as a ‘relevant filing system’.

 

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) produced guidance to help data controllers such as Barclaycard decide whether or not manual records were stored in a relevant filing system; however this was amended following a Court of Appeal ruling a number of years ago (Durant v FSA 2003). In light of the outcome of this case, the ICO revised its guidance and narrowed its interpretation of what constitutes a relevant filing system. This guidance suggests that unless the filing system is highly structured, it will fall outside the scope of the Act and led us to conclude that in our view most manual records fall outside the definition of personal data.

 

We recognise that the definition of a relevant filing system is open to interpretation and that not all parties will agree. During recent months we have once again been reviewing our interpretation of what constitutes a relevant filing system and intend to publish new guidance in the near future, although this is not as a direct result of the recent issues surrounding bank charges. The new guidance is likely to represent a significant shift in emphasis from our existing guidance and our view will be that many more manual records are likely to fall within the scope of the Act.

 

Following enquiries we contacted Barclaycard for a detailed explanation of its microfiche system, including how the information in it is stored and retrieved. It was not clear from the response whether or not the system was a relevant filing system; therefore Barclaycard invited a number of my colleagues to inspect it and see the system in operation.

 

Following our visit, we concluded that the microfiche system used by Barclaycard is a relevant filing system for the purposes of the Act. This means that in our view the information is personal data and should be supplied as part of a SAR within 40 days and for a maximum fee of £10.

 

As I explained above, we are currently reviewing our guidance on relevant filing systems and are placing greater emphasis on the types of systems that are covered rather than those that are not. This will be based on practical examples of non-computerised filing systems. Our decision in this case has been made with this shift in emphasis in mind and it appears that Barclaycard disagrees with us. In light of the Durant ruling and our subsequent guidance, it is difficult to maintain that Barclaycard has acted unreasonably in this matter and it could plausibly argue that its interpretation and subsequent actions were consistent with the accepted view. If this occurs it will be for the Information Tribunal and ultimately the courts to decide which, if either, interpretation of a relevant filing system is correct.

 

I hope this information is useful to you.

 

Yours sincerely

Laura Hennessy

Casework and Advice Officer

 

[N8!]

What is the best address to write to for the initial SAR for Barclays? Your branch address? Thanks.

[Guest Mumofthreeboys]

This one:

 

BARCLAYS BANK PLC

1 CHURCHILL PLACE

LONDON

E14 5HP