Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • did you submit your directions
    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Vulture Bank's Thread


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6340 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

ok I am about to send the following to Barclaycard, more to rattle their gilded cage than any expectations of them not being able to supply the signed agreement. Posting here for any comments before I send it.

 

 

Peter Townsend

Manager,

Barclays Data Protection

Radbroke Hall

Knutsford

Cheshire

WA169EU 17 August 2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

ACCOUNT NUMBER: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

 

 

Dear Sirs,

 

You have now exceeded the 40 days allowed by the Data Protection Act to supply data under my Subject Access Request dated 26 June 2006. A formal complaint has been lodged with the Information Commissioners Office and court proceedings will commence within 14 days for failure to comply with the Data Protection Act

 

In addition I note that among the data you have supplied there is not a copy of the original signed agreement. I hereby formally request true copies of the signed agreement referring to the above account number. This is my right under the legislation contained within section 77 (1) and section 78 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 - your obligation also extends to providing statements of account. I enclose a £1 cheque in payment of the statutory fee.

 

You are reminded that you are obliged to supply these documents, whether you are the original creditor or not, under section 189 of the CCA 1974.

 

As you are aware, a credit agreement that is not properly documented and signed by the customer is totally unenforceable under the CCA and therefore is a complete defence to any court claim that is issued.

 

Take note at this stage, that any legal action you may contemplate will be both vigorously defended and contested. In the meantime please be aware that I consider this matter to be “in dispute”.

 

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

[

sorry NOT trying to hijack your thread alan but i think this should be tagged to tamadus

It’s only a temporary “stay” here

---------------------------------------

because it appears these banks are setting up Data Subject Access Teams & we need a standard to overcome there “hurdddddles”

-------------------------------

I have formally by recorded delivery written to the Data contoller of hsbc BANK AT 8 CANADA SQUARE

THE OFFICIAL ROYAL MAIL WEBSITE

SAYS "Your item with reference AB XXXX XXXX XGB was delivered from our POPLAR Delivery Office on 28/11/06 . "

A response has been received from M.R.s L.y.n.n.e H.o.l.d.e.r Data Protection Officer -Who has written to me dated 6th December saying the letter has been forwarded onto HFC Bank Birmingham and you should shortly hear from them.

---------------------------

I have received the following reply from HFC

I would be grateful if you would complete the attached form

[ which actually has

 

MANY PIECES OF my personal DATUM (data is plural for datum) namely

Name address Date Of Birth

the type of account (current, savings loan etc

account number

Date account opened

branch/retailer at which the account was opened

all pre-filled in !!!!

]

and forward it to the address indicated. We will also require a copy of your driving license or valid passport. we will action your request upon receipt of the completed form.

Thank you for your payment of £10 made in respect for the use of this service.

I look forward to hearing from you shortly.

signed xxxxx etc

Subject Access Request Team

--------------------

Now it seems reasonable to me that option (a) if they decided to forward this information to me then they "reasonably" believe who i am

option (b) is that they are "reasonable" to assume I am not who I say I am !! In that case they have committed an offence under the Data Protection Act by disclosing each and every piece of “my datum” .

 

Section 15 says …… and additionally will need to include some details of security measures before processing data. 9by revealing these details they are “NOT” employing any security measures before “processing my data”

 

As an example BAD EXAMPLE of what they are doing it asks on the "form"

it says :-

Please highlight which account(s) you would like information regarding

please sign here................. date ................]

I have clearly asked for a “FULL” disclosure …… they simply have not read the letter. Moreover I believe if a person asks for a DSAR they have no right to ask this question.

 

 

my reply is on the lines of :--

I shall reply for to your request for either my driving license or passport.

May I point out that this is not an “off the street enquiry ” I fully understand that literally “hoardes of people are coming off the streets claiming their charges back” together with the fact that your is a “fledgling section” of HFC with "nano” experience.

Please note that the above address is the one which you normally use to communicate my private business to me and which you have hitherto found to be acceptable hence there is no problem.

May I point out that closer inspection of the Building Society cheque (value £10) of which I feel sure you have taken a copy will indeed reveal that the cheque is in fact an “over the counter” Building Society drawn out of the "day to day account" of which the balance is typically put on overnight deposit at "pre-defined" interest rates. The money taken to fund the cheque being immediately taken from the account of the person whose name is actually quoted on the "said cheque". Just above the words pay HSBC

It says XXXXXX/XXXX MR JOE BLOGGS .

In conclusion it would seem "reasonable" that indeed “yes” I am JOE BLOGGS .

(The clock started ticking on 28/11/06 on this DSAR and that is the the start date )

COINCIDENTALLY the word "reasonable"

features in the

Data Protection Act 1998

PART 3 - RIGHTS OF ACCESS TO PERSONAL DATA

Access Rights

Responding to access requests

Section 5.6 says Requests for access should be responded to promptly, and no later than forty days after the request and fee (and any additional information as to the identity of the applicant or the location of the information reasonably required by the data controller) are received by the data controller. In exceptional circumstances if compliance is not possible within this period the applicant should be advised accordingly.

 

 

BASICALLY WE NEED A STANDARD LETTER FOR WHEN THE “MAN IN THE STREET” COMES UP AGAINST THE THIS “ATTEMPTED BLOCK”

Perhaps we should all cut our credit cards in two and send them as proof of ID ?

Think I had better complain to the Information Officers Office 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)

Tam Wing Chuen -v- Bank of Credit and Commerce Hong Kong Ltd [1996] 2 BCLC 69

 

1996

PC

Lord Mustill Commonwealth,

 

Lord Mustill discussed the need to construe a contract contra preferentem: "the basis of the contra proferentem principle is that the person who puts forward the wording of a proposed agreement may be assumed to have looked after his own interests, so that if words leave room for doubt about whether he is intended to have a particular benefit there is reason to suppose that he is not."

Link to post
Share on other sites

[

sorry NOT trying to hijack your thread alan but i think this should be tagged to tamadus

It’s only a temporary “stay” here

---------------------------------------

because it appears these banks are setting up Data Subject Access Teams & we need a standard to overcome there “hurdddddles”

-------------------------------

I have formally by recorded delivery written to the Data contoller of hsbc BANK AT 8 CANADA SQUARE

THE OFFICIAL ROYAL MAIL WEBSITE

SAYS "Your item with reference AB XXXX XXXX XGB was delivered from our POPLAR Delivery Office on 28/11/06 . "

A response has been received from M.R.s L.y.n.n.e H.o.l.d.e.r Data Protection Officer -Who has written to me dated 6th December saying the letter has been forwarded onto HFC Bank Birmingham and you should shortly hear from them.

---------------------------

I have received the following reply from HFC

I would be grateful if you would complete the attached form

[ which actually has

 

MANY PIECES OF my personal DATUM (data is plural for datum) namely

Name address Date Of Birth

the type of account (current, savings loan etc

account number

Date account opened

branch/retailer at which the account was opened

all pre-filled in !!!!

]

and forward it to the address indicated. We will also require a copy of your driving license or valid passport. we will action your request upon receipt of the completed form.

Thank you for your payment of £10 made in respect for the use of this service.

I look forward to hearing from you shortly.

signed xxxxx etc

Subject Access Request Team

--------------------

Now it seems reasonable to me that option (a) if they decided to forward this information to me then they "reasonably" believe who i am

option (b) is that they are "reasonable" to assume I am not who I say I am !! In that case they have committed an offence under the Data Protection Act by disclosing each and every piece of “my datum” .

 

Section 15 says …… and additionally will need to include some details of security measures before processing data. 9by revealing these details they are “NOT” employing any security measures before “processing my data”

 

As an example BAD EXAMPLE of what they are doing it asks on the "form"

it says :-

Please highlight which account(s) you would like information regarding

please sign here................. date ................]

I have clearly asked for a “FULL” disclosure …… they simply have not read the letter. Moreover I believe if a person asks for a DSAR they have no right to ask this question.

 

 

my reply is on the lines of :--

I shall reply for to your request for either my driving license or passport.

May I point out that this is not an “off the street enquiry ” I fully understand that literally “hoardes of people are coming off the streets claiming their charges back” together with the fact that your is a “fledgling section” of HFC with "nano” experience.

Please note that the above address is the one which you normally use to communicate my private business to me and which you have hitherto found to be acceptable hence there is no problem.

May I point out that closer inspection of the Building Society cheque (value £10) of which I feel sure you have taken a copy will indeed reveal that the cheque is in fact an “over the counter” Building Society drawn out of the "day to day account" of which the balance is typically put on overnight deposit at "pre-defined" interest rates. The money taken to fund the cheque being immediately taken from the account of the person whose name is actually quoted on the "said cheque". Just above the words pay HSBC

It says XXXXXX/XXXX MR JOE BLOGGS .

In conclusion it would seem "reasonable" that indeed “yes” I am JOE BLOGGS .

(The clock started ticking on 28/11/06 on this DSAR and that is the the start date )

COINCIDENTALLY the word "reasonable"

features in the

Data Protection Act 1998

PART 3 - RIGHTS OF ACCESS TO PERSONAL DATA

Access Rights

Responding to access requests

Section 5.6 says Requests for access should be responded to promptly, and no later than forty days after the request and fee (and any additional information as to the identity of the applicant or the location of the information reasonably required by the data controller) are received by the data controller. In exceptional circumstances if compliance is not possible within this period the applicant should be advised accordingly.

 

 

BASICALLY WE NEED A STANDARD LETTER FOR WHEN THE “MAN IN THE STREET” COMES UP AGAINST THE THIS “ATTEMPTED BLOCK”

Perhaps we should all cut our credit cards in two and send them as proof of ID ?

Think I had better complain to the Information Officers Office 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)

 

As far as I am aware, they are entitled to ask you to confirm your identity.

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I am aware, they are entitled to ask you to confirm your identity.

 

i have quoted the word reasonable from the DATA PROTECTION ACT 1998 TO ME THE words in red below say reasonable

 

ask yourself how can i produce ten "forms" of identifying myself

 

realistically the most secure "top two " (security wise) have to be passport and driving license then credit cards ...... so LOGICALLY it seems that these are not "reasonable" forms of identification

 

 

when they see the photo does this help them ????

------------------------

 

..... something like a phone gas electric bill obviously is reasonable remember the data has to be sent to the actual address ,,, a passport is no guide to your current address and if a credit card is invloved this is a plainly ridiculous situation.

 

COINCIDENTALLY the word "reasonable"

features in the

Data Protection Act 1998

PART 3 - RIGHTS OF ACCESS TO PERSONAL DATA

Access Rights

Responding to access requests

Section 5.6 says Requests for access should be responded to promptly, and no later than forty days after the request and fee (and any additional information as to the identity of the applicant or the location of the information reasonably required by the data controller) are received by the data controller. In exceptional circumstances if compliance is not possible within this period the applicant should be advised accordingly.

Tam Wing Chuen -v- Bank of Credit and Commerce Hong Kong Ltd [1996] 2 BCLC 69

 

1996

PC

Lord Mustill Commonwealth,

 

Lord Mustill discussed the need to construe a contract contra preferentem: "the basis of the contra proferentem principle is that the person who puts forward the wording of a proposed agreement may be assumed to have looked after his own interests, so that if words leave room for doubt about whether he is intended to have a particular benefit there is reason to suppose that he is not."

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry NOT trying to hijack your thread alan but i think this should be tagged to tamadus

It’s only a temporary “stay” here

 

 

I am rather perplexed as to how this could be interpreted as anything other than hijacking. Not only did the subject have no connection whatsoever with my case - it also had nothing to do with the Consumer Credit Act!

Please read the FAQ's and post issues such as this in the correct forum, in your own thread.

POSTS DULY MOVED AND COMBINED INTO A NEW THREAD

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...