b/card, non-compliance DPA, microfiche- experts view please

[alanfromderby]

It is often a case with the IC office that you have to ask the right question.

 

Copy "statements", in whatever form, are not "personal data" as per Durant v FSA - although the "transactional information" contained within the statement is.

 

If "transactional information" is backed off onto an indexed microfiche system, the Smith v Lloyd's/TSB case categorically rules it in.

 

When a bank suggest that this information is available "at a cost", it must per sa, be easy to locate - otherwise they would not offer this service. If the information was not properly indexed they would be in breach of Inland Revenue regulations as well.

[lynzpower]

thanks so much for this.

 

I agree with you 100%

 

However, if I am going to take this one all the way I want to be 100% as far as I can

 

1) the information in microfiche is a relevent system due to being HELD - that much seems crystal to me

 

2) the IC say that they have requested to visit "some banks" to ask them to explain thier processes of storing data in relation to this issue. I asked how long this would take, reposnse almost as effective as "how long is a piece of string".

The IC dont seem to be placing a target ( which is rather unusual for government, dont ya reckon?) on when they want this resolved. but they are asking the banks to show transparancy. I almost choked.

 

I said to Linda at the IC today. If microfiche isnt a relevent system and a box of random papers isnt a RS either, what stops any organisation printing off whatever data they like, chucking it in a box and evading the act? "nothing really, but its not likely to happen" hardly regualtion is it ?

 

Barclaycard maintain they dont have any system to tell me what penalties theyve imposed prior to May 04, unless someone else somewhere has - dont want to rely on guesswork, it undermines everyones case I think if I act like a muppet with " i dont know what im taking you to court for"

 

So is the angle then to find out that they do have a list of charges and for them to cough up that they do. I just cant see them doing this, the floodgates will open, and they know it. And then complain to the IR?

 

Actually has anyone got these statements off Bcard microfische without paying for them. Id appreciate telling if they have, no point in me raking over when someones already achieved the outcome.

 

So many questions eh? Well keeps life lively if nothing else....

[alanfromderby]

It is important to remember that:

 

a) the ICO is snowed under with complaints

b) there has never been any time limit imposed on the IC for handling complaints

c) all the banks know this

 

Banks are using the fact that the IC has limited resources available to investigate complaints as a means to delay. The approach that I have adopted for two of my claims was to issue court actions under section 7 and 15(2) of the DPA (Bank Template Library - DPA Non-Compliance).

 

Both claims have had the desired effect, and have resulted in the information arriving - one of the cases could well now be resolved without the need for further court action, as it has opened a full dialogue with their legal department.

 

It really depends how litigious you feel.

[lynzpower]

I feel more litagous by the hour, this is really starting to hack me right off Alan

 

I want my cash, and not at the timescales of the IC.

 

I could happily avoid court for this, but it seems unless I wait for the IC to come to a miraculous decision, and pronto, I could be waiting for all eternity.

 

I do appreciate the IC snowed under, a point which I made to them on the phone, but again if they dont have targets, then things will drag on for all eternity, clearly a definitive decision is better now than whenever in the future for all concerned.

 

SO what do I do? Do I take them to court for non-compliance once my 40 days are up? Can anyone give me an idea what happens at these hearings, what Is expected of me and so forth? Or another link would be cool

 

Much appreciated comrades x

[Seminole]

Abbey only have a couple more days to file their defence to my claim and they haven't supplied the data yet. If they don't I will go for a judgement hearing and at that stage I am going to be doing my utmost to get this in front of a judge for a decision no matter what Abbey then do.

[lynzpower]

Thanks seminole

Still trying to get my head round this TBH.

 

Barclaycard have sent me the ubiquitous print off that means sod all to me. If Ive anyway of deciphering it, I will, however, I dont think this is likely unless anyone can help me out?

 

I would love to get this one in court myself, but only if IM on the right lines.

 

A) can they issue the defence that this pointless print out IS the list of transactions I need ( although again further discussion as to whether it is classed as data as its clearly indecipherable)

 

b) They could enter the defence re: the relevant filing system ( agree with others avout this being a bit goose-chasey) HOWEVER, under the stuff I wrote before, Its clear to me, in any case that this IS thus "relevant filing system", and in fact any judge worth his salt may well agree (im with whizzkid on this one, I did jury service last year and the judges in all cases were spot on)

c) I havent written to the IC yet, shall I do that or not bother? I guess I should, although I have spoke to them twice.

 

If A&B shall I take this to court under the DPA, or are there others doing it. Has anyone got to court yet to make this case law At the end of the day this is surely whats needed some case law to say, actually, this is a RFS, so stop hiding behind this lame argument and face fact you are refusing to comply with the DPA.

 

Sorry to over ask the same questions, but clarity to each of these points would be good, if only to stop me going into such a bad mood!!

 

Cheers again

Lynz

x

[Nightmare4banks]

Hi all!

 

I have had the same problem and received records dating back 2 years despite the fact I have had the cards for over 5 years.

 

In my view,b/card is totally in breach of the Data Protection Act on one hand and secondly it makes all credit card account holders in a "more disadvantaged" position in the event of claiming back charges by withholding the information they hold on each credit account holder.

 

It maybe possible to strike out any argument that b/card may present on the following grounds:

 

1.That b/card's failure to provide the information regardless is in breach of the Data Protection Act.

 

2.Unfair Terms Act(because you cannot claim your unlawful charges back without them).

 

3.The applicable EU directives in both Data Protection and Consumer Contracts - which I gather in certain aspects are quite draconian!

 

Anyway,this is my 2 pence worth!

[lynzpower]

nightmare for banks

What are you going to do next out of interest?

 

Lynz

[Nightmare4banks]

Hi all!

 

Lynzpower,very good question!

 

My current situation is as follows:

 

1.I plan to persue b/card for breach of the DPA regardless(I have only received the last 2 years records very recently) because if the letters b/card send out have any weighting those letters in my view are an attempt to bypass sending out the complete records that b/card has about all its credit card customers in the hope of reducing the amount of claims against it.The £3 fee is to deter credit card account holders for not claiming but dreaming to claim.Also,again another unfair charge that clearly has been capped by statute - The Data Protection Act 1998 - £10! Probably in breach of both DPA and Unfair Terms legislation.

 

2.I will complain to the IC - Do not have much faith in it though.However,maybe if many of us complain we will put pressure on b/card to comply with the law.

 

Also,

 

Do not forgot also b/card was the first issuer of credit cards in the world and potentially people could challenge unlawful charges dating back more than the limitation act amount of 6 years if they used the argument that has been put forward that because the fact that people have not claimed before is because this information had been concealed wilfully and intentionally by finance companies from the public over very many years and only has come to light very recently.

 

In my view,this is what is really worrying b/card.

 

In my case,I have not had my b/cards more than 6 years.

 

I will update you next week after I have read through the pile of papers I have received from b/card and spoken to the IC - for what it is worth!

[Bookworm]

Do not forgot also b/card was the first issuer of credit cards in the world and potentially people could challenge unlawful charges dating back more than the limitation act amount of 6 years !

 

B/card only introduced penalty charges mid 2001, when they ditched the annual fee, so the Statute of Limitations is not an issue here. (lose £10 annual fee, charge £20 x 2 each problem month... yep, that must have been a toughie for them!)

[Nightmare4banks]

Hi all!

 

Bookworm I never knew that and thanks for highlighting it.

 

As I said in my previous post that I have only just very recently received the 2 years records from b/card.

 

Anyway,a little less paperwork to go through for me.So I can go onto the next claim!

 

 

A few interesting observations to think about just came to my mind since my last post:

 

1.If b/card have only 2 years records that comply with the DPA.How can there be 3 years payments history on the credit report with any of the credit reference agencies regarding b/card credit card accounts?

 

2.In my view,this could also be mentioned in the claim against b/card.

 

3.Also anyone could challenge the accuracy of any of the over 2 year old data held on the credit files apart from CCJs because that was a judicial decision unless of course it was obtained unlawfully by b/card.

 

Also mention this to the IC and any or all of the Credit Reference Agencies - just to see what bulls**t they come up with.Then we can compare notes.

 

Again just my further 2p worth.

[Robertxc]

Barclaycard have sent me the ubiquitous print off that means sod all to me. If Ive anyway of deciphering it, I will, however, I dont think this is likely unless anyone can help me out?

lynzpower, the DPA is very specific that any data must be provided in an intelligable form. Your data should have come with some means for you to decipher it. If it didn't, you should go back and insist that they explain it for you.

[lynzpower]

thanks for this Robert

 

So, my NEXT piece of action today is

 

Phone rachel sheils and ask her to explain the print out to me.

 

I wonder if all affected by this from b/card just phoned up and asked for an explaination, would they be more likely to

 

a) send out data thats intelligible

b) pull the phone lines

 

Im gonna phone the IC and see if they can qualify this "held" issue that I have mentioned earlier.

 

Could we go for a group action ( lickthewallfatboy and others- you interested?)

 

Im fairly sure you can have group actions through small claims route as m,e & my previous housemates were advised to do so re an old tenancy agreement

 

Your thoughts greatly appreicated and thanks to mods for merging

[lickthewallfatboy]

 

Could we go for a group action ( lickthewallfatboy and others- you interested?)

 

Im fairly sure you can have group actions through small claims route as m,e & my previous housemates were advised to do so re an old tenancy agreement

 

Your thoughts greatly appreicated and thanks to mods for merging

 

this has got to be worth considering.If someone could explain the ins and outs of this I would like to read it....

[lynzpower]

Id like to know too

 

Lickthewallfatboy- Ive Pmed you with my email address, maybe we could chat it over on MSN?

[lynzpower]

This topic was closed on 10 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