Progenic V's Halifax

[progenic7]

Just sent off SAR today along with a few other banks, credit cards and finance companies. Maybe im being a little bold but i have made it very clear that i fully intend to take this to court and also that i fully intend to claim contractual interest on said claim. I have said the same thing to all the other banks and card companies too, i feel this is fully justified and the only real fair way to pursue this.

Dont know if it will help much but im getting in touch with the local paper to see if they are intersted in following the case. At the same time im going to forward all info in real time to the local MP, and maybe a few others i come up with along the way. I really want this to be a full blown exercise in humility for the banks and their crooked tactics.

 

here goes Muhahahahaha

[AWC]

Woohey! Go for it and keep us posted!

[progenic7]

Slightly modified the SAR in the template section to suit my own needs, note i have made it clear from day one i will be claiming contractual interest before i reach court.

 

tick tock.....

 

 

 

 

 

Halifax PLC

Trinity Road

Halifax

West Yorks.

HX1 2RG

 

 

20.1.07

 

 

Data Protection Act 1998

Subject Access Request

 

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

 

ACCOUNT NUMBER: xxxxxxxxxxxx

Sort Code: xxxxxxx

 

Please supply me with a complete list of transactions and charges relating to my banking history with your organisation. Alternatively, a complete set of statements for that period will be acceptable.

I must insist that this is treated as a Subject Access Request and the fee is accepted. I shall remind you of your legal obligation to provide a complete history of charges, and if you do not comply with this you will be in breach of the data protection act ! I do not want any incomplete “favours” from you !

 

Additionally, where there has been any event in my account history over this period which has required manual intervention by any member of your staff, or any other person, I require disclosure of any indication or notes which have either caused or resulted in that manual intervention, or other evidence of that manual intervention in relation to my banking business with you.

 

If you are unable to supply this data because there has been no such manual intervention, then please be so kind as to confirm this in your response.

 

I enclose the statutory maximum fee of £10. You have a maximum of 40 days in which to comply, though it would be nice to see a speedy response somewhat reminiscent of the speed in which you send out your own fees. Furthermore, when I discover that you have levied disproportionate penalties against me, then I shall be reclaiming them in full, and also reclaiming the enclosed £10 Data Protection Act subject access request fee. I fully intend to pursue this case all the way to court, at which point I shall also be claiming the standard 8% interest. However I believe that a claim for contractual interest at that point be a fairer way to proceed, and my determination shall not in any way falter in this matter. If after 40 days you have failed to respond, an official complaint shall be lodged with the information commissioners office, and court proceeding will be started to force compliance through the courts for a breach of the data protection act !

 

If there is specific information which you require in order to satisfy yourself as to my identity, please let me know by return. However, 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.

I would be happy to collect the Data from my local branch. (Worksop)

This letter has been sent recorded delivery and proof of receipt will be collected promptly from royal mail.

You have 40 days !

 

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

 

xxxxxxxx

[progenic7]

Very impatient and the clocks ticking....

 

still not here was hoping for a late night delivery of statements...

 

 

gonna stay up all night just in case....

 

 

i think they have arrived....

 

 

false alarm

 

tick tock, well i'll be ready when they come anyways..

 

 

gonna wait at the window just incase so bye for now

[progenic7]

still havnt even so much as acknoweldged that i have made a request, so with the help of Battleaxe V MBNA i put together a nice little reminder ! ;-)

 

 

Dawn Pugh

Senior Customer Relations Manager

Halifax Plc

Customer Relations

PO Box 548

Leeds

LS1 1WU

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Account number: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Dear Dawn,

I bring your attention to my letter dated 20.1.07 requesting a complete disclosure of data under the data protection act 1998 (Subject Access Request), I refer to complete disclosure in its most rigorous sense. It is noted that even though said letter was sent 20.1.07 and received by Halifax before 10am on 23.1.07 and signed for (proof collected from royal mail) that you have not even so much as acknowledged my request as yet. I was under the impression that a usual professional business would do such things as a matter of course by return, and purely out of business etiquette . This is somewhat worrying considering the fact part of my financial estate is in your safekeeping.

Furthermore I elaborate on my original request and listed below is a clear definition of what I require from you, this is of course additional to my original request which should be executed as per instruction.

I must also point out as it has been bought to my attention recently, that ALL information no matter how long held on file must be disclosed fully and in a format that is legible. It seems a lot of banks and credit card companies wrongly interpret the DPA 1998 as only needing to disclose six years worth of personal data. This is wholly wrong as several test cases have proven, and the RBS data controller was almost imprisoned for. The DPA 1998 clearly states that all information must be disclosed, this bears no correlation to the Limitations act 1980 at this stage.

You have until 3.3.07 after that you will be in breach of data protection act. Act now as you will be relying on your early actions later in court and a judge will take a very dim view of such a business deliberately stalling or supplying incomplete data.

The Information Commissioner has asked to be advised if I do not receive the data I have requested by this date.

Please note a cheque for £10 has already been sent in my original SAR dated 20.1.07 which you already have received.

 

I would be grateful if you would provide the following: -

• Full copies of all contracts which you believe exist between myself and your organisation, including copies of any documents you hold in support of same.
  
• Details of the identity of any individuals or organisations who have provided you with my personal information together with copies of any letters of instruction provided by them, or any contracts entered into between yourselves and the third party, and the relevant dates to which those contracts related.
  
• Copies of all documents which include any of my personal information including copies of any contracts or invoices, emails or computer records containing my personal information, or any records which pertain to this information.
  
• Full details and copies of any documents upon which you relied when you have provided my personal or financial information to any individual, organisation or third party.
  
• Full copies or transcripts of any computer logs or database records kept in relation to myself or in relation to my financial or personal information.
  
• Full copies of any correspondence in postal, email or any other format which you have entered into with any individual, organisation or third party which contains my personal or financial information, or which pertains to myself.
  
• Details of all systems you currently have in place to ensure my personal or financial information is kept securely, including details of those officers who currently have control of same, and at the time it was held or provided to a third party.
  
• Where any previous information or records held have been deleted or disposed of, the methods used to do so, including dates, certificates or references confirming details of destruction. Where you are unable to provide such certificates, please provide a declaration, signed by an authorised officer of your company, confirming the dates and methods of destruction of this data.
  
• Full hard copy print outs of any of my personal or financial information held in a digital, magnetic or any other format which is held in any archives, backups or other storage devices / locations. And Audio files
  
• Your registration number with the Information Commissioners Office.
  
• Your Consumer Credit License number.
  
• Your VAT reg number

Where reference to emails is given above, these emails should be taken from your email servers or backups / archives held in a magnetic or digital format. These emails may not be present on a user’s local system, and may require the assistance of your IT department / IT providers, who you should contact immediately for their provision.

 

Please confirm whether you hold a physical file with details of my personal and / or financial information. If so, please provide details and dates of any instance when this file has left your control, to whom it has been communicated, the method of transportation / communication e.g. Royal Mail, courier, by hand, electronically. Please provide a full copy of this file Where my physical file has left your offices, please provide details of any precautions taken to ensure that my information has not been lost, stolen, misplaced or made available to anybody who does not have authorised access, including those who would use my information for the purposes of identity theft, or registered with any credit agencies. Please also confirm whether any of the documents held within the physical file are computer generated.

 

Under S.40 of The Administration of Justice Act 1970, if you believe you have provided my information to any organisation, agent, or individual who could, or may have used it for unlawful purposes, you should contact me immediately, and provide full details of their identification and address, together with full details of any instructions you have provided to them. If you have forwarded or communicated my personal or financial information to any person, company, or organisation, please provide a copy of the authority, signed and dated by myself upon which you have relied prior to doing so. As requested above, you should provide copies on any such communications.

 

Under the Data Protection Act 1984 / 1998, as a Data Controller, you are responsible for the complete retraction of all information provided to any third party, should I request you to do so, and have a duty to myself to ensure that any personal or financial information I have provided to you is kept securely, and is only communicated to those to whom I have given my express permission / authority.

 

If you are unable to deal with this request, you should immediately forward it to the person within your organisation responsible for Data Protection. If you do not provide the information requested within the given time limits (final date 3rd March 2007) under current Law, I shall have no choice but to forward all information to the information commissioners office.

 

I will be filing in the County Court on the morning of 4th March for Non Compliance and damages, if I do not receive the documentation requested by 5pm 3rd March 2007.

 

I have enclosed a copy of my passport and driving license for identification purposes. I have been informed by the Courts I do not have provide identification at all. I trust this clarifies my identity and also gives you my signature as required under the DPA, I believe no further correspondence be necessary from myself on this matter. When all necessary documents and recordings have been collated they should be forwarded to my local branch for collection, Retford Notts or Worksop Notts.

 

Might I remind you one County Court Judge is prepared to jail the Data Controller of the Royal Bank of Scotland for not providing information under the Subject Access Request and the stalling tactics used by the Data Controllers to buy time.

 

.

I look forward to hearing from you in the first instance

 

Yours sincerely

Progenic7

[Bigmac versus]

This is going to be good reading, the very best of luck to you and this is one post i will keep an eye on.

[progenic7]

Thanks George

 

maybe you can detect by my actions that im Not scared anymore to challenge the banks. I have a pretty good idea of my rights and have free legal advise where necessary. (handy because you can claim £200 in legal advise costs back in the small claims court ;-) )

 

i want to give the banks a bit of what they have given everyone else for years.....SH*T

 

keep watching mate ;-)

 

 

this is gonna be fun

 

 

muhaahahaaaaaa

[Bigmac versus]

Yes i did think that and can see this ones gonna be fun.

[progenic7]

Finally today i get an acknowledgement (thats all mind you) enclosed there was 3 leaflets on the DPA,credit scoring and complaints process.

A whole lot of nothing really, oh well time flys and aeroplanes crash

 

not sure what is meant by relevent filing system, so i assume she is saying the original agreement signed by myself is not "Relevent" and anything on paper including all my statements. Need to delve a bit deeper as to what is relevent !

 

heres the crap she sent today anyway.....

 

 

 

HBOS

Business Risk – Retail (DSAR)

Trinity Road

Halifax

HX1 2RG

 

13th February 2007

Direct Line 01422 336200

 

 

Hey Progenic7

 

Data Subject Access Request — Account Number 0101010101 - Sort Code 1010101010

 

Thank you for your letter requesting access to the personal information held about you regarding the above account.

Please find enclosed copies of the following three leaflets for your information:

 

‘About you - Personal Information and Your Identity’

‘Credit Scoring - How we work out whether we can give you credit’

‘Personal Customer Complaints — Here’s what we’ll do’

 

I confirm I am currently processing your request and a copy of the information you are entitled to receive will be supplied to you as soon as possible, and certainly within the 40 days allowed by the Data Protection Act 1998.

Please note, HBOS plc is not obliged to supply records held in paper format as they do not form part of a relevant filing system.

Further details about the Data Protection Act, how personal data is defined and your rights under the Act are available on the Information Commissioner’s website at ICO – Information Commissioner's Office.

 

If you want to apply for details of your credit reference data, please refer to the ‘Credit Scoring’ leaflet for an application form and the ‘About You’ leaflet for additional information. In the meantime, if you have any particular queries regarding your request, please do not hesitate to contact me.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Michaela Topham

 

Data Protection Consultant

 

Retail Business Risk

encs

 

HBOS plc, Registered in Scotland No. SC218813. Registered Office: The Mound, Edinburgh EH1 1YZ. HBOS plc isa holding company,

subsidiaries of which are regulated by the Financial Services Authority

[progenic7]

Just drafted a little response after looking into "relevant file systems" in the post in the morning ;-)

 

 

Dear Michaela,

Thank you for finally acknowledging my SAR request under the DPA 1998 after 22 days.

I do have however a few questions about your data storage protocols currently in place at HBOS.

Your indication to non relevant filing systems indicates that all personal data held in paper format is neither in a relevant file system nor a semi structured system either. This worries me slightly as some of the more important documents relating to myself are of course in paper format, and as such should be processed in due course as personal data.

So I make the assumption that difficulties would be encountered if (as indeed I have already) requested for instance my original agreement and any other contracts in place between myself and HBOS. This begs the question then, considering you openly admit that important documents are not processed as per DPA 1998 protocol, where are they, and just exactly how are said documents kept.

I bring your attention to the following and ask you to take note.

Definition of “relevant filing system”

This is a file or system which has a structure or index that enables us to retrieve specific information about an identifiable individual. As a general rule if it is possible to go straight to the piece of information you are looking for then it is a relevant filing system. To decide whether or not a file is a ‘relevant filing system’ ask, ‘Am I able to go straight to a particular piece of information about this person?’

It is not a 'relevant filing system' if the information is: not in a filing system; in a general file labelled with the name of the individual, unless that file has an index or is internally sub-divided; in a file where all papers are filed in date order with no structure or index.

Minutes of committee meetings are not 'relevant filing systems' unless they are indexed and the index includes an entry for Dr X.

It is a 'relevant filing system' if the information is filed in a file with an index, contents list or other means of finding pieces of information. A file about a specific aspect of our interaction with Dr X is a 'relevant filing system', for example a file called 'Dr X's leave' or 'Dr X's research' or 'Meeting about Dr X'. A general file about a particular subject, such as the payment of expenses, is a 'relevant filing system' if it has a sub section dedicated to Dr X or if the papers in the file are kept in alphabetical order so that you can go straight to a set of papers about Dr X.

Semi structured personal data.

Semi-structured personal data is information which is organised enough for you to find information about a specific individual but not organised enough for you to go straight to a particular piece of information about them.

For example you might have a folder called Mr X which contains all personal data on that individual. If you are looking for Mr. X's annual leave record you know that it will be in that folder but there are no subdivisions in the folder to allow you to get straight to the leave record itself. This is semi-structured personal data.

Only data protection principles 4 and 6 apply to semi-structured personal data. However, you must automatically include all semi-structured personal data in any response to a subject access request.

Seventh principle

Appropriate technical and organisational measures shall be taken against unauthorised or unlawful processing of personal data and against accidental loss or destruction of, or damage to, personal data.

The definitions above provide useful parameters and suggest that manually held personal data should at least be in a semi structured format. Any personal data in a semi structured format would, even though possibly not structured as thoroughly as a computer filing system, still be accessible as a block of personal data. My SAR request clearly states that I want All personal data no matter what format it is held in. Clearly then as an example my mortgage “paper” documents highly important and relevant, according to yourself are in no particular filing system and cannot be easily found. This also raises further questions about HBOS ability to recognise the relevance of data, security protocol, and file system structuring ect.

Of course under the FOI 2005 (freedom of information act 2005) I would be able to access All information held on me no matter what format, file system or nuisance to the data controller. I suggest this route could cause significant difficulties for a very busy data controller, and would only be a last resort if all other attempts of access failed. In the test case Durant v Financial Services Authority (2003) it was the judge that defined “relevant” under the DPA, and as he said himself the next case may redefine it again. I feel it is a weak response from data controllers who use the term “relevant file system” as a means of not disclosing personal data. And one can only assume incompetence on the part of the controller for lack of organisation. I must point out that if for any reason I consider the SAR to be incomplete by lack of disclosure I will not hesitate to force compliance through the court. After which time I will apply for a detailed and extremely time consuming execution of FOIA for full disclosure. I hope this clarifies my position on personal data and what is “relevant” and what is not.

I must remind you that the deadline for the SAR to be executed is 3.3.2007 however to fully comply with said act all documents and audio recordings should be posted No later than 1.3.2007.

Yours Sincerely

 

 

Progenic7

[muggins73]

This is indeed snotty, and I thought I was bad:p

 

good on ya, should be added to the templates section, for sure:D

[progenic7]

well i finally got my statements after waiting what seemed like ages, i have briefly gone through them and on the face of it there isnt as many charges as i seem to remember.

 

Ahh well the amounts not really the issue here anyway.

 

with contractual interest its all adds up to £1105

 

just working on the prelim letter should have it done by tomorrow

[progenic7]

made a load of amendments being sent in the morning (sat)

any thoughts are welcome

 

By Royal Mail Recorded Delivery 2.3.2007

 

Dear sir/Madame

 

Account number: xxxxxxx Sort Code: xxxxxxxx

 

Request for refund of charges and miscalculations made in agreement.

 

My request

I am writing to ask you to refund the charges which you have levied upon my account since inception, hereinafter referred to as ”The Account”. I specifically make reference to early 2005 in which I accrued many hundreds of pounds in fees on the account with you. I am of the understanding that fees which you have applied to my account in relation to direct debit defaults, admin fees and so forth are unlawful at Common Law, Statute and consumer regulations. If you advance that these charges are not in any way punitive or unlawful then please make your averments clear on paper, showing a complete breakdown of costs, and your justifications, including specific legal case law, terms to be relied upon in court, and on what authority (apart from your own terms) you claim you can do this lawfully. If for any reason you cannot, or will not, advance these costs and justifications in order to reassure me that your penalties really do reflect your actual costs accrued. Then I can only assume that my averments are indeed wholly correct, and you are undertaking in a concealment of the truth, clearly highlighting your unlawfulness. I am sure you are now aware, due to media coverage ect, that charging a fee as a means of punishment or penalty due to a breach of contract is unlawful, unfair and against English Law in many ways.

 

I have spent the last few months reading and researching this subject in great detail, and believe I have built a very strong legal case. At this stage I do not want to advance to far into the complex legalities of my case, in the hope that this can be resolved without such measures.

However I am of the view that your charges represent a penalty and are therefore unrecoverable at Common Law. In the Scottish case of Castaneda and Others v. Clydebank Engineering and Shipbuilding Co., Ltd. (1904) 12 SLT 498; the House of Lords held that a contractual party can only recover damages for actual or liquidated losses incurred from a breach of contract. This is also the position in English law: Wilson v Love [1896]; Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motor Co Ltd [1915] AC 79; Ford Motor Co v Armstrong [1915]; Bridge v Campbell Discount Co. Ltd [1962]; Murray v Leisureplay [2004].Picardi v. Cuniberti [2003] B.L.R. 487. Brownlie v Campbell (1880) 5 App Cas 925, 950: ect.

 

Your charges do not reflect any actual loss; instead they appear to represent a lucrative profit-making scheme. The actual loss is the cost of automatically sending me a computer generated letter which I would respectfully submit is valued at no more than £2. Recently in a BBC television programme “The Money Programme” aired on Tuesday 12th December 2006, several experts in financial and banking services spoke on the subject of Fee’s. These experts in the field included;

 

i. Kieron Beal ( Barrister, Matrix Chambers),

ii. Joe Gardner ( HSBC - Gen Man of Personal Finance HSBC ),

iii. John Fingleton ( OFT Chief Executive ).

iv. Nicky White ( Head of Personal Finance at Uswitch )

v. John Struthers ( Professor of Banking University of Paisley )

vi. Philip Molyneaux ( Professor of Banking University of Wales Bangor )

vii. Ian Jarrit ( Former Executive of Nat West )

viii. Walter Merricks ( Ombudsman spokesman )

 

 

The conclusions reached between the experts, were frankly shocking, as they estimated that a returned direct debit could not possibly cost any more than £2.50 in a worst case scenario situation. At this point I draw your attention to your terms and conditions, hereinafter referred to as “the terms”. I specifically draw your attention to any clause(s) of The Terms, in which your averments, inter alia state your right to recover your incurred costs. Further I draw your attention to the clause (if any) of The Terms in which, inter alia your averments include your contractual right to claim interest in the event of any breach of contract.

After contacting IBAS (the independent banking advisory service) who as I’m sure you are aware are fully independent, non biased and a non political authority on banking related issues. I was shocked by their comments and shear frankness on the subject of penalty fees, they made it very clear in their averments that, it is quite common for a bank to abuse the court process and provide misleading data. Further to that the most interesting point I found noteworthy, was seemingly when a bank has a dispute with a consumer, they always defend (legally) no matter what the cost. This is of course only when the bank knows or has good reason to believe that they have a good case.

 

I bring your attention to, inter alia that a contract(s) (if any) binding any of the parties hereto, out of mutuality of contract the binding terms are effective on both parties. Further without prejudice to the above paragraph I reserve the right to advance any authorities with the notion of stare decisis, atany time in this case, specifically at this stage English case law, Chitty of Contracts, OFT case law and the FSA’s principles.

 

Further I feel that even though I will give you every opportunity to correct this unlawful behaviour, I fear that you will not avail yourselves to such an offer.

I also fear that you may advance that your charges are perfectly legal, lawful and transparent simply because they were written in the terms. At this point I make no admission, or have any recollection of ever receiving your Tariff of charges, or indeed ever having them drawn to my attention. I aver that the terms were not in any welcome pack produced by you, at the time of account inception.

Further I also fear you may avoid producing a complete breakdown of charges, and indeed may be using Nemo debet prodere se ipsum as a defence to hide your guilt in these matters.

 

Accordingly, the charges applied to my account are not a reasonable pre-estimate of your loss in relation to my account. Your charges would appear to represent a device to recover global losses (for example, loan defaulters, bad debt write off, including commercial lending in, and out with, the UK).

 

I hereby advance, and fully intend to prove that:

i) your charges are penalties;

ii) Your charges do not reflect actual losses incurred;

iii) Your charges are unlawful;

iv) Your charges are unfair;

v) Your terms are a misrepresentation of statement, and possibly a fraudulent misrepresentation.

vi) Your charges are excessive;

vii) Your charges are generally disproportionate;

viii) Your charges are punitive in nature;

ix) Your charges are not a genuine pre-estimate of loss incurred by yourselves in respect of any alleged breaches of contract on the part of the Claimant;

x) not intended to represent or related to any alleged actual loss in respect of any alleged breaches of contract on the part of myself, but instead unduly enriches yourselves while you are conducting your regime of charging with a view to profit;

xi) not intended to bear any relation to your actual losses which you can show you have incurred and wouldn’t of incurred but for any alleged breaches of contract on behalf of myself; and

xii) are held in in terrorem to discourage me from presenting items on the Account for payment where there are insufficient funds to cover such payment of said item;

xiii) Your charges are contrary to the FSA’s principles of business and

xiv) Your charges are finally contrary to the Banking Codes principles of fairness.

 

Without prejudice to any paragraphs hereinabove of this claim, all contractual provision(s), if any, between the parties hereto, which purport to permit you to levy the Charges to the Account, are unenforceable by virtue of:

i. The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the UTCCR)

ii. The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (hereinafter referred to as The “UCTA’)

iii. The Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982; and

iv. The misrepresentation Act 1979; and

v. The common law.

 

 

 

Under the unfair terms in consumers contracts regulations (hereinafter referred to as the UTCCR) I advance my arguments under statute.

i. 5. - (1) A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.

ii. 6. - (1) Without prejudice to regulation 12, the unfairness of a contractual term shall be assessed, taking into account the nature of the goods or services for which the contract was concluded and by referring, at the time of conclusion of the contract, to all the circumstances attending the conclusion of the contract and to all the other terms of the contract or of another contract on which it is dependent.

iii. 6.-(2) if there is doubt about the meaning of a written term, the interpretation which is most favourable to the consumer shall prevail but this rule shall not apply in proceedings brought under regulation 12.

iv. 8. - (1) an unfair term in a contract concluded with a consumer by a seller or supplier shall not be binding on the consumer.

v. Part 2: INDICATIVE AND NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF TERMS WHICH MAY BE REGARDED AS UNFAIR; Reg 5(5).1

vi. © making an agreement binding on the consumer whereas provision of services by the seller or supplier is subject to a condition whose realisation depends on his own will alone;

vii. (e) requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation;

viii. (i) irrevocably binding the consumer to terms with which he had no real opportunity of becoming acquainted before the conclusion of the contract;

ix. (m) giving the seller or supplier the right to determine whether the goods or services supplied are in conformity with the contract, or giving him the exclusive right to interpret any term of the contract;

x. (k) enabling the seller or supplier to alter unilaterally without a valid reason any characteristics of the product or service to be provided;

xi. (o) obliging the consumer to fulfil all his obligations where the seller or supplier does not perform his;

 

 

Under the Unfair contract terms act (hereinafter referred to as the UCTA) under the following sections I hereby give authority to my averments;

i. (2) In the case of other loss or damage, a person cannot so exclude or restrict his liability for negligence except in so far as the term or notice satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.

ii. (3) Where a contract term or notice purports to exclude or restrict liability for negligence a person’s agreement to or awareness of it is not of itself to be taken as indicating his voluntary acceptance of any risk.

iii. (9)(1) Where for reliance upon it a contract term has to satisfy the requirement of reasonableness, it may be found to do so and be given effect accordingly notwithstanding that the contract has been terminated either by breach or by a party electing to treat it as repudiated.

iv. (11)(1) In relation to a contract term, the requirement of reasonableness for the purposes of this Part of this Act, section 3 of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 and section 3 of the Misrepresentation Act (Northern Ireland) 1967 is that the term shall have been a fair and reasonable one to be included having regard to the circumstances which were, or ought reasonably to have been, known to or in the contemplation of the parties when the contract was made.

 

 

 

 

0n 26 July 2005, the OFT stated that 'a charge is likely to be disproportionately high if it is more than a court would be likely to award if the lender sued the account holder for breach of contract'. Because your charges include such an excessive profit margin, in addition to actual loss, they are irrecoverable as an unfair term in contract. I believe that your charges require me to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation for incurring transactions which were ultimately declined by an automated software driven computer system. In addition, it is unfair to require me to subsidise your global debt recovery costs and debt write-off protocols.

 

It has now been confirmed that your particularly high level of penalties are considered to be unfair per se by the OFT who reported on 5th April 2006 and are therefore presumed to be unlawful in the absence of specific proof to the contrary.

 

Your responsibilities

I would draw your attention to the terms of the contract which you agreed to at the time of execution. It is an implied term of that contract that you would conduct yourselves lawfully, fairly and in a manner which complies with English law.

 

I am frankly shocked that you have operated my account in this way as I had always reposed confidence in your integrity and expertise. I consider that your repeated representations that your charges are fair and reasonable are deceptive and that they have deceived me into agreeing to pay them. Your concealment of the true nature of your charges has prevented me from asserting my Right until now.

 

What I require

 

I calculate that, as at today’s date, you have taken a total of £620 in excessive penalty fees plus £1.81 in interest on these charges. In addition, I also claim Contractual Interest (compounded) under the principle of mutuality and reciprocity in our contract. The unauthorised rate of borrowing is 29.84% therefore this rate is added to the above amounts (from date of penalty fee) and the breakdown is shown in the enclosed schedule. I calculate the Contractual Interest element (to 2nd March 2007) at £485.94 to date and rising at a rate of £0.45p per day, which Is equal to 0.072% daily compounded.

 

I am also seeking to cover my actual costs incurred in terms of time, postage fees, SAR fee and stationary fee’s ect.

To clarify my position about these charges I advance the following:

 

Unlawful charges clearly identifiable £ 620

TOTAL Penalty fee + interest = £ 1107.75p

 

Costs:

Time taken in internet and book research, letter writing, spreadsheet and legal preparation ECT @ £9.25 per hour x 30 hours to date = £ 277.50p

Postage costs to date £ 6

Stationary costs to date £ 15

SAR Fee £ 10

 

TOTAL AMOUNT REQUESTED IN SETTLEMENT: £ 1416.25 TO TODAYS DATE ACCRUING INTEREST @ £0.45 PER DAY

 

I request that you refund this amount in full, payable by cheque directly to me.

 

Targets to resolve this matter

I hope that you will enter into a sincere dialogue with me about this matter and write on the assumption that you will prefer to do this rather than merely respond with standard template letters and leaflets. After having watched and read the responses of hundreds of HBOS cases, I understand your protocols in defending these costs. I strongly aver that your costs are not transparent, lawful, or legal just because they are written in the terms, and I suggest you read this letter carefully and give it a very considered response!

You have 10 working days, from receipt of this letter, to reply unconditionally accepting my request in principle and letting me know a date by which I will receive payment. I feel I must point out that if you do not avail yourself to this opportunity, to be fair and open, you will be leaving me very few options other than further action.

If you do not respond, or do not respond positively, within this time period, I shall send you one further letter allowing a further 10 working days in which to reflect. I believe that these targets are more than sufficient for a large company such as yours with dedicated staff and departments. After that there will be no further communication from myself and I shall issue a County Court Claim at the expiry of the second deadline. At which point I will also be claiming the court fees, any further expenses and exemplary and aggravated compensation.

 

I look forward to hearing from you by return.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

Progenic7

 

 

Statement of truth: I hereby declare that hereinabove be the truth

[AtMoSpHeRiC]

LMAO

 

That is just brilliant I can not wait for their reply on that one hahahaha

 

great job!

 

AtMoSpHeRiC X

[jaxads]

Wow -- that's good!!! I'm going to keep any eye on this thread to see how you get on.

 

Very best wishes.

 

Jaxads x

[muggins73]

Looks fabulous, but do you honestly think the dimwits are gonna bother to read it, let alone take its contents onboard?

 

I to can not wait for their response;)

[Bigmac versus]

Hi Pro and thought i would see how your doing, good reading and this looks like a headache for those bankers, keep up the goodwork.

[dpick]

Hi Progenic I started my claim with the money grabbers same day as you.

only response was letter to say statements authorized if not arrived in 10 days Ring 391152.10 days nothing got very charming but uninterested lady "We have until 28th February to deliver"

28th came nothing sent DPA compliance letter. Got 32 letters 2nd March containing 156 pages of statements. Checked through statements total £2295 sent off LBA1 . will watch your thread with interest.

 

dpick

 

HALIFAX DPA sent 17/1/07 LBA1 sent 02/03/2007

MBNA DPA sent 28/2/2007

CAPITAL ONE DPA sent 28/2/2007

 

Progenic I think you are lighting a very warm fire under them Thanks from all of us.

[progenic7]

posted the letter (Prelim) off today with 14 (amended days) on it, till they get the LBA

 

Cant wait till i can file my N1 form with the 16 page PoC, im really looking forward to that day, muhahaha

[progenic7]

ok received a response fromDarren Divvy (or maybe darren diven), just a templated latter not even signed.

They basically tell me they have 8 weeks to look at my "complaint" lol and the FSA tells them that no less.

Well Darren let me tell you, you dont have 8 weeks, actually you dont have anywhere nera to 8 weeks, try another 2 weeks and you'll be having court papers served upon you.

Dont you just love the arrogance of the banks, they really think they have the right to do just about anything.

Wrong !

just ammending my new LBA that will be sent first thing Monday 19th March with 14 days till N1

[Bigmac versus]

Its starting to heat up a bit now, lol.

[dpick]

ok received a response fromDarren Divvy (or maybe darren diven), just a templated latter not even signed.

They basically tell me they have 8 weeks to look at my "complaint" lol and the FSA tells them that no less.

Well Darren let me tell you, you dont have 8 weeks, actually you dont have anywhere nera to 8 weeks, try another 2 weeks and you'll be having court papers served upon you.

Dont you just love the arrogance of the banks, they really think they have the right to do just about anything.

Wrong !

just ammending my new LBA that will be sent first thing Monday 19th March with 14 days till N1

 

dpick What gets me is they respond to your "complaint" you are demanding a refund of unlafull charges etc against your account

Next time they send letter regarding late payment I think I will send letter "I am looking into your complaint etc.

 

hit them hard then hit them again. dpick:mad:

[progenic7]

yep the heat certainly is getting turned a bit now.

 

hey i like the idea of sending thema letter back saying i am looking into their complaint

 

Funnily enough i was awoken by the postman early this morning knocking on the door, strange i though as i wasnt expecting any parcels.

Signed for the parcel and low and behold its a plethora of papers from the Halifax (all the ones i was told were irrelevant)

Funny how a "complaint" gets people moving huh, Michaela Topham from the compliance section at good ole HBOS said only the copy statements would be sent. they have even sent the original agreement and application (printoff as it was done on computer) and a mass of other stuff.

Well it looks like my "little extra" time i put in to writing the letters has kind of paid off.

Cant wait till they read my LBA Muhaha

 

Peace

 

 

(except for the banks...in which case DIE DIE DIE )

[Bigmac versus]

Treat them as they have treated you over the years.

[progenic7]

Hi all,

 

sent off LBA yesterday, giving them the usual 14 days to respond.

 

i'll keep you posted as and when i get news

 

johnny