Nothing to lose other than what I've ALREADY lost!

[fairydustforever]

cross1217...

 

Actually my dates are the same as yours. Claim submitted on 28th, deemed served on the 30th, but courts have given Abbey til 15th Jan to respond.

 

But now we just sit and wait hey! I estimate my claim to be about £2.5K but without the statements it could be more.

 

Will watch your case with particular interest.

 

Goodluck cross1217 and Happy New Year to you too

[fairydustforever]

Forgive me for starting a new thread but I can't find ME!!

 

What hope have I got when I can't even find my own thread???!!!

 

Can anyone find me please???

 

Deb

[Rooster-UK]

Click on the following link. It will take you to your thread.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/9924-nothing-lose-other-than.html

 

All better now.

 

Regards, Rooster.

[fairydustforever]

Karnevil,

 

Did you name the official Data Controller in the POC ?

 

Sorry??? POC??? Back to basics Karnevil, what little brain I have is shot to pieces!

 

Reference your PM to me, do I write and tell the courts now that abbey have now sent me my statements??? Or do I wait for Abbeys defence??? (deadline for thier defence is 27 Jan)

Who will send me Abbeys defence??? Abbey? The Court?

 

Being that I dont actually understand what Abbey are defending at this stage.... what do I do if they DONT file a defence???

 

HELP PLEASE x

[fairydustforever]

Hi Fairy, Hope you are ok.

 

Don't worry it is normal for Abbey to file a defence to the non compliance with the data protection act claim.

 

When the defence arrives, if you can scan/photograph or type it out that would be really helpful.

 

Now you have now received all of the statements your were asking for ?

Yes I have received all 6 years of statements - in one envelope!

Easy it would seem!! And yes I did keep the envelope, but it doesnt show a dated postmark! BUT... there was a covering letter with the statements dated January 5 2007.

You received these AFTER you filed your claim.Therefore you just need them to repay you the court costs.

Yes I would very much like to recover my £150 court costs. But isnt this the judges decison??? How do I know whether or not the judge decided that my claim should include my court costs being refunded by Abbey??? The court clerk made a point of telling me that the judge might decide that I shouldnt get my court costs back from Abbey.

 

In response to he NEXT statement....Yes, I issued my claim on December 28 2006 which was deemed served on December 30 2006. Abbey filed an acknowledgement of Service on January 8 2007.

Check the date of service on your claim and check the dte the statements were sent out to you.

see above

Basically what we need to do is tell the court that the bank have provided you with the information asked for in your claim but havent paid your court costs.

Ok, do I do this now??? Or wait for the defence to arrive IF it arrives???

Who do I address this letter to???

We also need to write to abbey thanking them for the statements and asking them to pay the court cost (£150!)

YES YES YES

Don't worry about the bundle you wont need it at this stage. I'll work on some wording for the letters to court and abbey for you.

Again, thank you xxx

You can start working out how much they have had off you in the last 6 years from your statements, entering it in the spreadsheet, and getting the preliminary request for repayment sent off.

ok, Ive done this, its just over £1000 I think, haven't totalled it properly yet. I will enter it on the spreadsheet tomorrow and then probably PM you Karnevil for you to check I have done it correctly (if thats ok?? )

 

 

Thank you to everyone who has posted and offered their advice/support, it is very much appreciated. I am sorry I dont post more often on other peoples threads, only I dont feel in a position to offer any advice!!!...when Im struggling so much to understand it all myself.

*T*H*A*N*K*Y*O*U* *A*L*L* xxx

[fairydustforever]

:o OH NO!!! :o Karnevil :o your mailbox is full!!! :o

[fairydustforever]

Hi all,

 

Can anyone explain in Leymans terms the difference between all the spreadsheets that vampiress has kindly done for us???

 

Obviously I know that I personally am looking at the ones re Reclaiming Bank Charges but there are still several options.... 1, 2, 3a and 3b.

 

I dont understand all the different terms and am worried I may use the wrong spreadsheet!

 

I am aiming to reclaim all the charges incurred as a result of:

Charges for clearing VISA payments and Direct Debits whilst overdrawn

Unpaid cheque charges

(not sure if Im entitled to claim for 'charges for an overdraft that has not been authorised' - where I have gone over my overdraft limit)

 

Obviously I would like to reclaim these charges together with the interest incurred since these charges were applied.

 

But which spreadsheet?????????

 

Can anyone advise/help please??

 

Fairy

[fairydustforever]

Hi Karnevil,

 

Need to communicate with you... have received a defence from Abbey!!! Am really baffled!!!

 

Will try to PM you now.

 

Fairy x

[fairydustforever]

For everyones info and interest.

 

I recently filed a claim with the courts regarding Abbeys failure to send me the 6 years worth of statements that I requested with my original Subject Access Request back in June 2006! The County Court claim was for Abbey to send me my statements. And Abbey DID send me my statements ONCE ordered to do so by a judge!!!!

 

 

I haven't read Abbeys defence properly because I am quite stunned to have even received a defence!!

 

Basically, my understanding is that Abbey have filed in their defence a long arguement stating that they have NOT failed to comply with my original S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)'s request (together with the microfiche arguement!) and lots of reasons as to why this expectation of them to supply 6 years worth of statements is unreasonable!! They talk of their filing system and contest that we refer to it as a 'relevant filing system' and state how many hundreds of thousands of files they would have to go through to send me MINE!!! or indeed YOU yours!!! Stating that not only is this request unreasonable but near on IMPOSSIBLE!!!

 

BUT THEY HAVE SENT ME ALL MY STATEMENTS FOR THE LAST 6 YEARS!!!! ALL IN ONE ENVELOPE AT THE BEGINNING OF JANUARY!!! SO IT WASNT THAT IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE THEY HAVE DONE IT!!!! AND I MIGHT ADD.. WITHIN NINE DAYS OF THE COURT TELLING THEM TO!!!! (and thats including a couple of Sundays plus allowing for postage!!! AND over New Year!!! so assuming they were closed for business on New Years Day - they did it in just FOUR days!!!!)

 

What they go on to say is that they deny that I have suffered any loss and therefore stating that I am NOT entitled to the relief claimed or any relief from Abbey!!!!

 

Im wondering if this is a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing??? Did the person who filed this defence on Abbeys behalf to my claim not know that someone else from Abbey had already sent me my statements???!!!

 

Confused!!! :confused:

 

Has anyone else received similar????

 

Fairy

[fairydustforever]

:eek: OH MODERATORS PLEASE HELP!!!! :eek:

 

I just tried to post a message that has taken me almost TWO HOURS to type... when I clicked submit, it asked for my log on details again. On entering those details, the screen went blank and my message appeared lost with a fresh blank message box ready for me to begin writing!!!!

 

PLEASE PLEASE see if you can find it!!!! It was a copy of Abbeys defence to my claim.

 

Fingers crossed, everything crossed!!!!!!!

 

Fairy

[GaryH]

Hang on fairy, I might be able to save you the trouble of typing it. I should think it'll be exactly the same as this one, yes? http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-cahoot-successes/43925-garyhs-oh-abbey-non.html

 

I'm sorry I haven't replied to your PM yet. I've got some time tommorrow so if you like I'll have a good read of your thread then and see if I can help.

[fairydustforever]

FAIRY

and

ABBEY NATIONAL

DEFENCE

• Unless otherwise indicated references to paragraph numbers are references to the numbered paragraphs in the Particulars of Claim issued on XXXXXXXX

• Paragraphs 1 and 2 are admitted.

• As to paragraph 3, it is admitted that the Claimant sent a Subject Access Request dated XX June 2006. The defendant paid the sum of £10 in accordance with section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998.

• Paragraph 4 is denied. The Defendant denies that it has failed to comply with the SAR. It has provided all the data which the Claimant is entitled to receive pursuant to the Act.

• Under section 7 of the Act the Claimant is only entitled to receive ‘personal data’. Pursuant to section 1 of the Act ‘personal data’ is defined (in so far as relevant) as:

‘’data which relate to a living individual who can be identified

a) from those data, or

b) from those data and other information which is in the possession of or is likely to come into the possession of the data controller………’’

• Pursuant to section 1 of the Act ‘data’ is defined as follows:

‘’information which

a) is being processed by means of equipment operating automatically in response to instructions given for that purpose;

b) is recorded with the intention that it should be processed by means of such equipment;

c) is recorded as part of a relevant filing system or with the intention that it should form part of a relevant filing system; or

d) does not fall within paragraph (a), (b) or © but forms part of an accessible record as defined by section 68’’

• Section 68 concerns health, educational and public records and therefore sub-section (d) is not relevant to the present proceedings.

• ‘’Relevant filing system’’ is defined as:

‘’any set of information relating to individuals to the extent that, although the information is not processed by means of equipment operating automatically in response to instructions given for that purposes, the set is structured, either by reference to individuals or by reference to criteria relating to individuals, in such a way that specific information relating to a particular individual is readily accessible’’

• The Claimant’s SAR was made in relation to bank statements and information in relation to the charges levied in an account number XXXXXX held with the Defendant (‘’Account’’). The defendant keeps this information on its automated ‘’live’’ system for up to 18 months. In compliance with the SAR, and in accordance with sub-section (a) of the definition of ‘’data’’ under the Act, all relevant data stored on the ‘’live’’ system has been provided to the Claimant.

• After the 18 month period has elapsed, the Defendant transfers the information held on the live system onto microfiche. The microfiche is then stored and, if necessary, retrieved as follows:

10.1 It is stored in boxes covering a 2 month period (for example, January and February, or March and April). There are usually 4 boxes covering each 2 month period.

10.2 Each box contains a range of account numbers, such that (by way of example only) ‘’box 1’’ could cover account numbers 1-500 and ‘’box 2’’ account numbers 501-900.

10.3 In the circumstances, in order to search for microfiche dating back for a period of 4 years would require a member of the Defendant’s staff to check the fronts of 96 boxes to identify the relevant boxes containing microfiche records relating to the account, then search the contents of 24 different boxes identified and finally go through an average of 450 different accounts on the particular microfiche in order to locate the specific records of the individual account.

10.4 Each piece of microfiche contains the records of a number of accounts and there is a note on the fiche itself of the range of account numbers that it covers.

10.5 The microfiche in each box are stored in numerical order, although each box contains approximately between 8,000-9,000 pieces of microfiche. The member of staff searching for or retrieving the microfiche has to check through the boxes manually to find the relevant information sought.

10.6 Once the correct microfiche has been identified, the member of staff has to put it into the fiche reading machine and then manually find the correct account number. Once the correct account details have been located the information is then printed onto paper. This process has to be repeated for each piece of microfiche retrieved from each relevant box.

• Accordingly, the manual microfiche storage and retrieval operations do not fall within the definition of ‘’relevant filing system’’, such that the information stored as microfiche does not fall within the definition of ‘’data’’ and is not covered by the provisions of the Act. The records are not stored in a manner broadly comparable with computerised records: they are not sufficiently structured nor readily accessible, they would have to be retrieved manually at great length and cost to the Defendant.

• In the premises, in not providing such information as is stored on the microfiche, the Defendant has not failed fully to comply with the SAR nor is it in breach of any of its obligations pursuant to the Act.

• It is denied that the Claimant has suffered loss, as claimed or at all.

• Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief from the Defendant.

STATEMENT OF TRUTH

********************************************

Can someone tell me…. Am I right in thinking that the above means that a member of Abbey staff would have to search the front of some 96 boxes to find the relevant 24 boxes that contained somewhere within ‘my account’ information???

And would this member of staff then have to manually sort through 8,000-9,000 microfiche in EACH of these 24 boxes?Thats a staggering 216,000 microfiche

And once the 24 microfiche relevant to my account could be identified, would this member of staff THEN have to put each one of these 24 microfiche into the fiche reading machine and search through approx 450 different account numbers on each microfiche!... in total that’s 10,800 different account numbers.

And THEN am I right in thinking that then this member of staff could print off all relevant account information onto paper?????

If I have understood this correctly… then Abbey is right… that is almost impossible!!

But yet SOMEONE (a super human being by the sounds of it!!!) managed to do all this for me in just:

4 days

A rather speechless Fairy!

[fairydustforever]

ahhhhhhh...... thanks Karnevil!!

 

Thankfully I DID save it in word BUTI wrote a load of stuff after once I had copied and pasted it!!

 

Never mind.... have managed to re post it above and abbreviated my additional comments.

 

Please read

 

Fairy x

[fairydustforever]

Karnevil you really are an angel

 

I have read hil00222's thread as advised and have searched and found relevant info regarding the Information Commissioners Office... all of which was VERY helpful! Thankyou

 

ALL OF YOU who tirelessly respond to our...

questions:confused:, grumbles:x, groans:-x ... you all have seemingly endless patience.

 

The support and guidance that you consistently offer around the clock to each and every one of us is truly commendable!!!

 

And I want to thank you all AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN

 

Thankyou... Thankyou... Thankyou...

A very proud Fairy xxx

[fairydustforever]

nudge

[Glenn UK]

Fairy

 

Can i just confirm the process so far?

 

1.You submitted the SAR and gave them 40 days (Did you use the template from the library?)

2.They failed to provide all the data you wanted so you sent them an LBA 3.They failed to respond to your LBA so you filed you N1 for non-compliance (can you post or otherwise send me your particulars of claim?)

4. The court issued the claim to abbey who acknowledged and filed a defence.

5. Abbey also sent you six years worth of data? Did they do this AFTER the claim was issued by the courts or before, this is important with respect to your costs.

 

Now you want to know what to do?

 

My thoughts, if you used the template from the library for your SAR you did in fact ask for all the data they hold on you, not just the last six years.

 

Secondly, depending on what you put on the claim from you may still have a claim to get them to supply the rest of your data.

 

Third, if you are happy with the statements you have and will never want to look at the previous charges you may have incurred then you can wrote to the court saying the claim is settled save for costs.

 

So i guess what I'm saying is i need a little ore information to be certain about all your choices, once i have them ill let you know what i think.

 

HTH

 

Glenn