Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sweatband.com I like many of these online retailers – and also retail shops – which sell their goods, make all sorts of claims for their customer service et cetera – but when things go wrong they refer you to the manufacturer. Of course this can be a very sensible arrangement because the manufacturer is better placed to deal with the problem – but we tend to find that very often the manufacturer is pretty reluctant and of course because they are not the retailer, there really not too bothered about their customer-facing reputation. So as has been suggested by my site team colleague above, you are being fobbed off. Secondly, any attempt now to start saying that the treadmill should not be used in the garage – when this has not been referred to at all when it was being sold to you, is in effect introducing a new term into an existing contract. This means that it has no effect whatsoever and is not binding. Sweatband.com are bound by the law of contract and also by the Consumer Rights Act 2015. You are entitled to purchase a treadmill which is of satisfactory quality and remain that way for a reasonable period of time – and you are quite right, it hasn't matched up to those standards and so sweatband.com are in breach of contract. It has nothing to do with the manufacturer. If the manufacturer really want to say that it should be kept in a garage then that's between them and sweatband. It's especially telling that according to you sweatband have actually said that this is a great thing to keep in your garage. I would suggest that you go around the Internet – trust pilot et cetera putting up reviews about sweatband – who as I have said after fobbing you off and letting you down – but also you should put up separate reviews about this particular brand of treadmill and make sure everybody sees that even the manufacturer is saying that it should be kept in a garage and that they won't stand by their product when it breaks down after three months. I can imagine that the person who said this to you from the manufacturer will get a bit of a talking to. Maybe you can tell us the make and model number of this treadmill so that references to it will come up in Google hits in the future. The situation as advised by my site team colleague is that as it has failed within the first six months, the retailer is entitled to one single opportunity to carry out a repair and failing that they are obliged either to replace the item or to give your refund at your option. These are rights which have been created by the Consumer Rights Act 2015. These rights should be asserted in writing You should write to the retailer immediately and put them on notice that you are asserting your rights under the 2015 act and you are giving them a single opportunity to repair the treadmill. Tell them that given its size and its weight, it will have to be repaired at your home unless sweatband.com want to take responsibility for picking it up and selling it to whoever they want to get it repaired by. I can imagine sweatband won't be happy about this and you are going to find everybody's going to start dragging their feet. I can imagine also that sweatband would try to up the ante by saying that it is your responsibility to return the treadmill to them. That would be wrong. The treadmill is defective. Sweatband are in breach – and it is up to them to deal with the problem. I think you will need to be quite assertive and I would suggest that your letter to them should give them a seven day window to let you know what the arrangements are and that the treadmill should be repaired or replaced in any event within 14 days. Please keep us informed as to what happens. Just so you know what we will advise if sweatband don't step up to the mark – if they don't let you have a satisfactory response within the first seven days then we will be suggesting that you begin the claims process by sending them a letter of claim – which then leads to a small claim in the County Court. This is not something you should worry about. Your chances of success are much better than 95% and I can imagine that at the end of the day sweatband.com don't want this kind of trouble and once they realise that you are happy to confront them, they will buckle down. Of course you never know – maybe they are going to act brilliantly and respond correctly immediately – in which case it will be kudos to them. Let's see  
    • Simple answer to that is gambling and having borrowed way too much previous to 2018 and simply not being in a position to meet all debts so always robbing Peter to pay Paul. From last year it just began to catch up. Then covid came and made it worse. Income reduced and job changed and dealing with mental health issues. That’s really the long and short of it. 
    • The UK's inflation rate surged to 0.6% in December from 0.3% in November despite Covid curbs. View the full article
    • Fears had grown over the Alibaba founder's whereabouts because of pressure from Chinese authorities. View the full article
    • I felt outmatched to be honest. Lowell probably did identify me on here and decided to send one of their more experienced. The guy they sent to last hearing didn't sound half as competent. The solicitor and judge were pretty much talking amongst themselves. That's how it felt. The Judge understood and accepted what the solicitor said at every point. She accepted fresh start as a brand name only. She accepted all the evidence were copies. She accepted I entered into a valid agreement. She accepted the error on the default notice was a typo. Felt like I lost before the hearing. If not, I wasn't able to express my points well enough. Not like the claimant who I'm sure was giving a law lesson. Completely out of my depth. I didn't ask to appeal. I'm upset understandably but grateful for all the help and support I received here. I've learnt a hell of lot but hope to never need it again.
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Barclaycard DPA & Microfiche Issue


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 5346 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

This post may be long, so please bare with me, but I think you will find it both relevant and usefull.

 

 

In 1998 I was defaulted by barclaycard due to penalty charges applied to the account and they subsequently sold the debt onto a DCA sometime around the middle of 1998.

 

In 2004 the default came off my credit file and the debt was statute barred.

 

Now, in february 2006 I applied for a credit card with l.p.f which is underwritten by barclaycard, which at the time I didn't know.

 

About 9 days after the application I recieved a letter from barclaycard which said:

 

"Thank you for your recent application for a l.p.f card, unfortunatly on this occasion we are not able to offer you a card at this time as our records show that you have previously held a barclaycard product to which you did not maintain the terms and conditions of".

 

I really didn't think much of it at the time, however after reading the numerous posts on here about banks and credit card companies stalling on DPA requests and hiding behind the microfiche arguement that data over 2 years is stored on.

 

My points are:

 

1) If data over 2 years is stored on microfiche and does not form part of a relevent filling system How come it only took them 9 days to find such info.

 

2)If they can acssess such info within 9 days why can't they do it, within this time frame under a subject accssess request

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you would find that they keep a list of customers who have defaulted on their accounts for quite a few years. This would be easy to do, and would be held on computer. This is totally different to the extremely high volume of daily transactions, which would take up a massive amount of storage space, and clutter up their systems.

 

I would expect a bank to keep records such as this for a lengthy period of time - far longer than they are obliged to keep transactional information.

Alan, Derby, UK.

 

 

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________

 

Sorry, but I cannot deal with your case by PM - please ask questions in your own thread. If you do not get a reply within 48 hours send a PM, with a link to the relevant thread, to any Site Team Member.

 

DO NOT SEND QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR CLAIM TO ADMIN, or our WEBMASTER - YOU WILL NOT RECEIVE A REPLY.

 

Advice given is purely my opinion, and is not based on any legal training.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you would find that they keep a list of customers who have defaulted on their accounts for quite a few years.

 

Really, I was under the impresion that they can only keep data for as long as is necesary.

 

 

This would be easy to do, and would be held on computer.

 

so surely this is availlable under subject accsess, which I requested in 2005 and they said that they dont hold data on me !!!!!!

 

This is totally different to the extremely high volume of daily transactions, which would take up a massive amount of storage space, and clutter up their systems.

 

If this is the case, then why are people from here who have been defaulted having so many problems with their subject accsess requests, and for those who have been succsessful in their requests, such data is not shown on their accsess request ?

 

I would expect a bank to keep records such as this for a lengthy period of time - far longer than they are obliged to keep transactional information.

 

I thought that data controllers can only hold such data for as long as is leaglly nescessary

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just received a reply from Barclaycard for my Subject Acess Request under the DPA and they are requesting the statutory fee of £10 before releasing the information BUT they have said

"....Please note statements that are prior to May 2004 are not held on a computer system or a structured relevant filing system and therefore, they do not fall under the Data Protection Act 1998. They can be obtained from our Customer Services Dept at a cost of £3 per statement."

I am sure this is untrue and that any information held about a person which can be used to identify them is deemed as being included under the Data Protection Act 1998. Can anyone clarify that this is just a ruse to try and put me off requesting such info @ £3 a pop for each statement?

 

Thanks x

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 11 March 2019.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 5346 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...