Boobaby vs GE Capital & DCA - Help please !!

[Sparkie1723]

Boobaby

Go to the threads on Buchanan Clark & Wells you'll find some real good ammo to fight Buchanan Clark & Wells with.

 

Sparkie 1723

[Sparkie1723]

I would send a subject data access request a few days before sending that letter, that will get the wheels moving for them to start processing your request and there you will get the black & white proof that they do hold data about you if they get your letter first they could delete all the info and write back they dont hold any and only use the info given by thier client and that info is then 2Lost" garbage of course but get them surrounded first before you go for the kill

Sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

In order to make someone comply with the Data Protection Act 1998 The Sixth Priciple you must submit the SDAR undersection 7 " duty to supply information pursuant to section 7" that will cost you a tenner but its the only way you can make them give you ALL the info they hold about you, and from who supplied it to them.

 

sparkie 1723

[Sparkie1723]

Find out who put the default there if it was GE CAp then they are the ones who have to remove it ....if it was BCW then they are in more trouble they are using someone else DP licence and should not have put it there in the first place.

 

sparkie1723

[Sparkie1723]

BCW Group PLC ....are not the same company as Buchanan Clark & Wells Ltd of 24 George Square Glasgow... they are completely seperate company with a completely different, set of directors they have a different registerd office at companies house ,and they are not registerd with the Information Commissioners Office and furthermore they are illegally using the data processors licence of another company AVANCE Ltd the Company they used to be.

 

 

Name & Registered Office:

BUCHANAN CLARK & WELLS LIMITED

24 GEORGE SQARE

GLASGOW

LANARKSHIRE

G2 1EG

Company No. SC223606

 

Status: Active

Date of Incorporation: 24/09/2001

 

Country of Origin: United Kingdom

Company Type: Private Limited Company

Nature of Business (SIC(03)):

7487 - Other business activities

 

 

*There are no entries that match your search criteria.*Registration NumberNameAddressPostcodeOrganisation sub-division

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Registration Number: Z6481590

Date Registered: 01 March 2002 Registration Expires: 28 February 2007

 

Data Controller: AVANCE GROUP LIMITED

 

Address:

16 FARMELOAN ROAD

RUTHERGLEN

G73 1DL

Other Names:

BUCHANAN CLARK & WELLS

ONE80

This register is the one the Glasgow comany is using illegally

 

 

 

Sparkie1723

[Sparkie1723]

As I said Bev that,s a completely different company.

 

They are not the Debt Collectors from glasgow

 

 

sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

Hiya Bev I'll try and clear the misunderstanding up.

 

Each and every individual Ltd Company who has its own registered office address and processes data MUST have its own individual licence.

Therefore Buchanan Clark & Wells Ltd in Glasgow do not have a licence to process data......... fact.

 

To get the picture right, go to ICO web site go to the register search and punch in Black Horse Ltd ( its the easiest one I know) You will see that every different Black Horse Company has its own licence ....because IT has to.

 

 

Sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

Oh baby boo baby,

 

Thought we had something for you there sooooooorrrrrrrrrrrrrrry!

 

I try and find something else.

 

keep smiling

 

 

sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

Hi Boo,

To get that default removed from the CRA files, write to the CRA's tell them that the information they have been supplied with has been supplied by a company that is/has committed a criminal offence under the Consumer Credit Act by supplying information about a CCA agreement that does not has complied with the C.C.A. and under the circumstances that as they have now been made aware of those facts any further processing of data appertaining to this account/agreemnent, they also will be an accomplice, in committing a criminal offence by way of failing in their responsibility to ensure the info is correct and lawfully supplied and under the circumstances "suggest" they remove it immediately to avoid repercussions on themselves.

 

sparkie1723

[Sparkie1723]

Hi boo,

Get a recording machine attached to your phone and record what these *5$****'s say.

Anyone who is getting this sort of harassment do the same

 

sparkie1723

[Sparkie1723]

Boo,

Tell them you intend to issue for a court to be made under section 14 of the Data Protection Act, make it strong and tell them you intend to issue that immediately.....and do it.

 

they will have to proove to the court that have taken reasonable steps to ensure the information is correct

 

Also quote them this from the legal guidance given by the Information Commissioner her/him self.

"Under the new Act it is now not enough for the data controller to say that, because the information was obtained from the data subject or a third party, they had done all they could have reasonably done to ensure the accuracy of the data at the time. Now data controllers may have to go further and take reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy of the data themselves.

The extent to which such steps are necessary will be a matter of fact in each individual case, and will depend upon the nature of the data and the consequences of the innaccuracy for the data subject."

 

A bit long but its there .

 

sparkie 1723

[Sparkie1723]

Hi un1boy,

can't find the link but its in the Legal Guidance book issued by the Information Commissioners Office... you can get a copy free if you order it from the Information Commissioners Office.

I've had mine ages

 

The number is ISBN Number:1 870466 23 3

 

If Thats any help

 

sparkie1723

[Sparkie1723]

Hi Boo,

 

I'm not a legal whizkid in any way whatsoever but I would write the letter containing the lot, I think the more you make them believe you know what you are talking about even if you dont...bluff them.... they bluff you ....so call their hand...

It will give them something to think about if you make them understand you are serious.

Make sure you emphasise the fact that they have to take the reasonable steps in line with each case has its own merits.

, and if it is found they are holding incorrect info after you warning then about it, then they will have to face the consequences as the Act states.

 

sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

Hi un1boy,

The 1998 Data Protection Act replaces the 1984 Act and is called the New Data Protection Act even though its nearly 9 years old , the "new" act was introduced in stages, the first stage started on 1 March 2000 and ended in October 2001, this was done to allowtime for all data controllers and users to change their data systems etc....What it meant at that time, was data controllers could still the use the old act to cover their antics, now they can't, the 1984 Act had 100 times as many loopholes in it than the New one and thats got enough as it is.

 

sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

Boo

 

I'm in agreement with your view of the Incompentent Comic Orgainsation, I've had the same letters ....your case has now been closed etcetc.... because my case got too hot to handle.

 

sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

No Boo,

 

Postie never brought me any good or bad news today.

 

sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

Hi boo write something along these lines

 

go get em gal LOL

sparkie

 

 

To CRA

 

Compliance & Admin Unit

 

 

Dear Sir(s)

 

I write to you with regard to information that has been supplied to you, and you have placed or allowed it to be placed on my credit file.

You must be completely aware of the following,

 

Under the New Data Protection Act of 1998 Credit Reference Agencies, are now no longer considered data processors, they are now data controllers, who “receive” “alter” and “process data further” ie change the information from the initial data received.

 

You must also be aware that data controllers sometimes must go further than taking what used to be “reasonable steps” to ensure the information they process is “accurate , true & correct”.

 

You have been made aware of my disputes in relation to this information and have failed to proffer the due care & diligence in that you have a duty to me to ensure that the data is indeed correct, in line with the provisions of the Act, inasmuch as that you must treat each & every individual case on its own merits rather than applying a blanket view when taking what used to be considered accepted stance "reasonable steps"

 

The information you hold that has been supplied to you and further processed by ( here you put the name of the company(s) and the info you refer to,) has not been verified it cannot be verified as true and is being/has been supplied to you under an agreement where criminal offences have been committed, the OFT are investigating this issue.

You have not taken the steps to verify the fact if the data is or if it indeed ever was, if you had done so you would have found out that the data was untrue & being incorrectly and unlawfully supplied.

Under the libel laws it is not acceptable in any way to say that "you believd the data to be true" the publisher MUST have documentary or other evdence to defand a libel/defamation suit.

The sooner that more people are aware of these facts the more CRA's will take the steps to verify information instead of merely believing an institution, and perform the tasks they were supposed to be for.

 

Unless you immediately remove all reference to this data you are will be deemed an accessory to these criminal Acts.

 

I also make you aware that as the data is untrue, and cannot be proved to be so , you are defaming me under the Libel Act and unless you comply with my demands, I fully intend to take action in the County Court for Defamation & Libel ,for the reason yu have allowed this incorrect unproven data third parties to seen (by the viewing of my Credit file) i.e published.

 

Action you may or not know can now be taken in the County Courts by the common people for libel , this step has been made available to allow the general public to have access to the Libel Laws and it is no longer a law for the rich and famous.

 

One of the reason for this is for this particular fact to enable the public to take actin against CRAs if they can prove the data is untrue and unlawfully supplied in my case I can

 

Under the Libel laws it is also no longer necessary to prove loss ( financial or otherwise). I will be relying on the ruling of the Privy council where it was ruled credit reference agencies are not immune to the laws of libel.

 

I suggest & demand that you comply immediately …no further request s or letters will be written to you regarding this issue, but you can be assured this letter will be produced in court in any action I take against you.

 

 

Yours ………….

 

Ivor Right

[Sparkie1723]

HI Boo, That will definately give the Directors office compliance units of the CRA's something to think about to think about, the more people who write in this way to the CRA's the better it will make them realise they can no longer "pull the wool over" individuals anymore.

 

sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

Boo, Write back to this Imperaial solutions and tell them in no uncertain terms ....not to contact you again in any way by letter, phone etc ( bluff them by saying any incoming calls from them will be recorded by you to be used in evidence against them)and that they should proceed with their Court Action as you will the counterclaim for wrongful pursuit o a debt under section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act which although is a criminal offence does have a civil remedy clause within that Act.

 

sparkie