Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've also seen it mentioned that the two parts of Ireland becoming closer is concerning HMG.   And that NI still coming under EU rules for trade could be showing that it's better to be in the EU than in Brexit Britain. If people start to think it shows Brexit isn't working, that's going to be a problem for Johnson et al.
    • You won't be able to bring a counterclaim unless you can produce a properly structured assessment of losses or costs or ancillary expenses and you will need to do this by producing at least written assessment et cetera as I have indicated above. Two of them would be much better. A court won't entertain a counterclaim simply based on your own speculation as to your possible costs. I understand very well that your preference would be to write off the entire job including all of the materials that were supplied and for you to recover your outlay for those materials but I think in order to do that you would have to show that you have acquired no value from those materials and once again I think that you would need an expert assessment which explained why the materials were completely wasted and that you would have to start from zero. You can be certain that the claimant will attempt to say that you have received value and in fact that the items which have been supplied or already installed can still be used. I'm afraid that because the attempt to arrange this contract as a cash only agreement inevitably invites the scepticism of the court, I think the court may well be open to consider arguments that the items which have already been supplied are of use to you. If you can get expert confirmation that the supplied materials are now of no use whatsoever, then you will also have to get a quote for uninstalling them and returning them to the claimant. This means that the whole thing is getting even more complicated. I do think that your best interests would be to discuss the matter with your new installer and to see what items which have been already supplied can be used to finish the project – and then to try and deal with the claimant in respect of those on the basis that the case would be withdrawn and everybody would walk away. I think it's time to start abandoning some of this rancour between you because it isn't helping and it won't impress anybody. Don't underestimate the disapproval that will be felt by the court when they get to know about the cash arrangement and this won't be helped by the fact that you then went ahead to try and get receipts. I understand very well that you say that you simply provided money and that in fact you were the purchaser of the items directly from the retailer – but there is no evidence for that and it would be an unusual arrangement and I think the court might express scepticism about that as well. I think we have to bear in mind your credibility in this – and I think that it is rather fragile at the moment. If you came up with a sensible business- like idea about how to put this one to bed and then put it to the claimant and also mention the fact that as he was involved in a cash only transaction, he also might find that he is incurring the displeasure of the court – particularly as he is the claimant, he might feel inclined to try and wrap it all up and bring it to an end. I think the next thing you must do is to get an expert report as I've already suggested above. You will need to do this anyway. If you don't have an expert report then even if you happen to win your argument that there is a breach of contract, the assessment of how much you win will be impossible for the court to decide. The court will absolutely want expert assessments. So you need an assessment as to the work which has been carried out so far and the work needed and costs involved to carry out the job. You need an assessment as to the usability or otherwise of the equipment which has been supplied. At least that for the moment. I don't think it is possible to do much more until you have this information. If you can get the information then we can decide what to do. Obviously I don't know anything about the subject, but I can't imagine that all of the equipment which has been supplied is useless. It could only be useless if you suddenly say that you want an entirely different system of gates – but on that matter, you are bound by your expectation in the contract and you would only be entitled to install a similar system using similar equipment.  
    • I wonder whether part of the UK issue with current NI protocol, is that it is enabling a better trading environment between Ireland and Northern Ireland.     Northern Irish businesses have anticipated import/export issues with Great Britain, so now trade with Ireland or via Ireland.   Apparently reports are that some Northern Irish businesses have seen an increase in trade. It is only businesses that mostly sell British fresh produce that have been affected by border controls  and even then, they could swap to local produce.   Agree that UK Government are using argument with EU as a convenient distraction, but also there must be a worry about increased risk of a united Ireland, as a indirect consequence of Brexit.
    • Fintan O'Toole has an article about the Brexit negotiations and what he thinks HMG's aims are.   Facing chaos and needing a scapegoat, the Tories seek an endless fight with Europe | Fintan O’Toole | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM The EU’s proposals on the Northern Ireland protocol offered what business leaders wanted, but the prime minister prefers failure and grievance  
    • The carmaking giant is investing £230m in its Halewood plant, safeguarding 500 jobs.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

NatWest SAR - identity verification by HooYu


parity4all
 Share

Recommended Posts


I need to lodge a Subject Access Request (SAR) to Natwest and ask for information they hold about any previous accounts. Remember having an account with them around 2006-2007 but it was closed a few years (two or three years) later. 

There is no longer any record of the account in any of my credit agency files. Chances are that Natwest won't have either. 

 

Anyhow, it seems Natwest have automated the SAR process and are using HooYu for the identity verification (the same ID verification system they use for account opening, I believe):

https://personal.natwest.com/personal/gdpr-triage-page.html#continue

 

Has anyone lodged a SAR to Natwest using this system? Is it straightforward?

The reviews on Trustpilot about HooYu isn't great. 87% of 1 star reviews from a total of 39 reviews. None of the reviews have been responded to by HooYu. They have a facebook fanpage, however, no review section and comments by customers are not responded to. 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The bank is entitled to make reasonable enquiries to ascertain you identity assuming that is necessary.  Of course if you are already a customer and they have you on record then it is completely unnecessary.

 however they are not entitled to impose a particular form of identity verification on you and if you can verify your identity by  other means than they are bound to accept that.

 

Not only that, the 30-day deadline for responding to an Sar  begins from the date that they received the request and they are not entitled to delay that simply in order to verify your identity.

In other words they must start preparing the disclosure even though your identity is not verified although they are not obliged to make the disclosure until they are satisfied that they know who they are dealing with.

 

I think I would be worried about this verification service as well .  I can't imagine that they aren't gathering some of your personal data for use as some kind of marketing tool or something.

 

I think someone should raise a complaint to the ICO.

 

Also if you wanted some fun you could make an ordinary written request for disclosure to the bank including reasonable verification documents such as a utility bill and passport and see whether they knocked you back. If they did then they would be in breach which clearly would cause sufficient distress to warrant a small claim and to get a few quid out of it as well as giving the bank a much-needed slap.

 

 

 

 

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...