SLC Cannot Supply The Original Agreement

[noomill060]

Were you receiving statments on the old card for the 12 year period?

 

 

I moved in 1987, I dont know whether they continued to send statements after June of that year. I didnt want anything more to do with Barclaycard,so didnt bother telling them of my change of address.

[JonCris]

FOR THE ATTENTION OF: Zubo , SteveH2508 and others.

 

Please feel free to disseminate any information that I intimate on this site, although I suggest that my understandings and opinions should be corroborated and not relied upon (I apologise for the disclaimer).

 

I should explain that my status places me in a delicate position, however I believe that it is in the interest of Consumer Protection and, indeed, in the wider Public Interest , that I contribute to these discussions as appropriately as I am able to do so within particular confines.

 

A Well Wisher.

 

Dear Richard

 

As far as I can tell your posts have been most informative. Therefore I for one, as I am sure others, do look forward to reading & even on occasion being guided by them

[zubo]

Dear Richard

 

As far as I can tell your posts have been most informative. Therefore I for one, as I am sure others, do look forward to reading & even on occasion being guided by them

 

Well said JC.

 

Richard as you know anonimity is very important to us, I certainly am unconcerned if I am identified however other folk do and we respect that. We also understand that the snippets which you offer are from your own research and most folk I know tend to corroborate as best as they can.

The annonomity however cuts both ways and we are well aware of the mishievous ways are good friends use, so everyone please use caution. Richard - hopefully being a new contributor you will not be offended if your contributions are dealt with cautiously.

I for one welcome your fresh input, ... and look forward to the next snippet

 

Regards

 

Z

[ShootMePlz]

Can somebody please tell me where I stand if the company send me a copy of the agreement after the 12 working days and then after the 1 month as I can't seem to find anything about this anywhere, and also my next course of actions reguarding a default notice being sent to me in the same envelope lol.

[Richard Spud]

I am not at all offended zubo, indeed it is very adroit of you and I fully understand and appreciate any caution. Furthermore, I fully agree with the suggestion that authority in corroboration should be sought for any comments.

 

I should add that I do not endorse the intentional evasion of any legally enforceable liability for an agreement regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1997 and subordinate legislation, based on “Won’t pay” rather than on the ability to make reasonable repayments for unsecured debt. Furthermore, I believe that many others would agree that financial institutions have a responsibility to their shareholders (the primary aim being to make a profit for same) to recover delinquent or defaulted accounts.

 

Notwithstanding the above; I believe it is reasonable to assume that the very existence of forums, such as CAG, have been necessarily created due to the failure of some financial institutions to act in a fair and equitable manner when attempting to collect debts from their customers (many of whom may have contributed to shareholder profits over many years) and who apparently justifiably feel as though customers have been treated in an unconscionable manner.

 

I am pleased to promulgate particular information in my possession to assist the general public in matters such as these and which I do with a clear conscience.

 

On a lighter note; the following quotations spring to mind, the first being often quoted:

 

“A banker is a fellow who lends you his umbrella when the sun is shining and wants it back the minute it begins to rain.” Mark Twain.

 

“I’ve written to the bank and told them if they send me any more nasty letters I shall take my overdraft elsewhere.” Jed Larson.

 

“They usually have two tellers in my local bank. Except when it’s very busy, when they have one.” Rita Rudner.

 

“Banks have this new image of being your friend. If they’re so friendly, how come they chain down the pens?” Alan King.

 

I hope this is of assistance.

 

A Well Wisher.

[elizabeth1]

You don't need "concrete proof". All you need is a list of incoming calls with times and dates. Proof of a criminal offence is a matter for the enforcement authorities and they can access the records they need to prove that these calls took place. The list you give them is simply corrobatory and also makes it easier to find the proof in the lists of thousands of calls they'd have to go through to build a case.

 

 

Can you get a list of calls incoming from BT by any cjhance?? I did look on their website and couldn't find it.

[Peterbard]

Peter,

 

Somewhere in their millions of useless leaflets the OFT / FSO actual state that the continual use of phone calls may commit an offence under this act.

 

Their guidelines actually state one call a day is permissible although I'm inclined to think that a reasonable person would find 1 call every day a bit over the top.

Hi

 

Thanks for that the good old OFT i will search thier data base

 

Many Thanks Peter

[zubo]

You have been a wise little squirrel Zubo

 

hey BA thanks for the scales!

[zubo]

Richard,

 

I just knew you would understand...

 

... and I think your very old jokes are very humourous and relevent today... thanks for those!

 

:D:D

 

Z

[Richard Spud]

I thought I might just highlight this section of my previous post, as it may not be generally known that the ICO support this view.

 

I understand, electronically held recordings (digital not analogue) of telephone conversations could be required to be divulged to a Data Subject if a request to a Data Controller is made for Subject Access Rights under s.7(1) of the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

Hope this helps.

 

A Well Wisher.

[Guest Battleaxe]

It took some doing to get my copy of a telephone recording A & L kept referring to, it took six months before going to the FOS to make them hand it over and then, they edited it, because they said it breached the DPA..so how do I know they haven't doctored the rest? it sounds so disjointed when played. it is going to Court with me and let them explain it to the Judge

[joneshousehold]

How on earth can a supplying a recording of a telephone conversation with you breach DPA - it's your conversation for goodness sake!

 

Do you know they really are so far up their own exhaust pipes at times.

[Peterbard]

Thanks Peter, that's what I wanted to say but couldn't (and by the way, your typing has improved!)

 

HI M

 

hanks i am doing my best.

 

Peter

[JonCris]

It took some doing to get my copy of a telephone recording A & L kept referring to, it took six months before going to the FOS to make them hand it over and then, they edited it, because they said it breached the DPA..so how do I know they haven't doctored the rest? it sounds so disjointed when played. it is going to Court with me and let them explain it to the Judge

 

Then they haven't complied with your DPA request I should give them one more chance then report it.

 

I suspect they actualy mean the criminal act of harrasment & lies

[Guest Battleaxe]

How on earth can a supplying a recording of a telephone conversation with you breach DPA - it's your conversation for goodness sake!

 

Do you know they really are so far up their own exhaust pipes at times.

 

 

Apparently is to do with the security questions they asked. I can onhly surmise that point.

[Guest Battleaxe]

Then they haven't complied with your DPA request I should give them one more chance then report it.

 

I suspect they actualy mean the criminal act of harrasment & lies

 

Oh I haven't finished with A & L by a long shot yet. They are so naughty and when the chickens come home to roost they wont ever forget my name.

[Richard Spud]

It took some doing to get my copy of a telephone recording A & L kept referring to, it took six months before going to the FOS to make them hand it over and then, they edited it, because they said it breached the DPA..so how do I know they haven't doctored the rest? it sounds so disjointed when played. it is going to Court with me and let them explain it to the Judge

 

Congratulations Battleaxe on your determination in obtaining at least some limited response to your request for a copy of recorded conversation under the DPA.

 

I suspect that what you have obtained is edited to remove all of the comments of the company’s representative on DPA grounds as you intimate. Notwithstanding this; I read with interest that you intend to submit the edited recording in proceedings. While I would not seek to advise you in this matter, and assuming that proceedings are in the County Court, I suggest that you might consider seeking legal advice as to what a District Judge might prefer to be laid before him/her. Perhaps in addition to the original recording, a verbatim transcript with the omissions clearly marked might be helpful. Furthermore, it may assist the Court that prior to any hearing at which evidence is to be produced, that the other party (i.e. an opponent Company) be given an opportunity to respond to direct questions in response to the filing and serving of a “Request for Clarification and Further Information” under Part 18 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

 

It may be helpful if I explain my understanding that when a Part 18 request is made, that the Respondent is required to reply with a Statement of Truth within a reasonably stipulated period. Failure to respond, I suggest, could give rise to an Order of the Court being made upon the Respondent. I understand that such an order can stipulate that any response is to be used purley for the proceedings before the Court; therefore, I suggest that the matter of confidentiality argued under the DPA might be overridden – you should seek advice on this. In any event, it appears that an admission has been made that a recording exists (otherwise it could not be edited) and the Court may not feel it unreasonable for clarification in writing be sought as to the edited sections.

 

In the circumstances that a recording of a conversation exists made by a Data Subject for instance, a comparison could be made with one provided by a Data Controller - which would satisfy any suspicion of tendentious editing by the Data Controller – and which, I understand, could be produced in evidence. In this regard, I believe it has long been established at common law that an audio recording of conversations between parties is admissible evidence as long as one of the parties to the conversation has knowledge of such a recording is occurring. By way of illustration of my understanding I refer to the following:

 

1. Recorded conversations in person,

 

2. Recorded conversations via telephone apparatus,

 

With reference to 1 above; the facts might be that a customer of business surreptitiously records a conversation between him/her and a representative of the business – perhaps during antecedent negotiations regarding a proposed Regulated Consumer Credit Agreement – and following a dispute the covert recording is produced by the customer in support of statements made by the representative, then I believe that this would be admissible evidence, with no requirement that the representative had been informed prior to any recording occurring.

 

With reference to 2 above; I believe that the legal position is more complicated and I do not seek to elaborate further herein save to say that I understand that an individual is not required to register as a Data Controller under the DPA if electronic records are stored on computers etc for the personal use of an individual. However, the following links may provide some interesting pointers regarding the recording of telephone conversations.

 

DISCLAIMER

 

Any person considering interception, recording or monitoring of telephone calls or e-mails is strongly advised to seek his/her own independent legal advice and should not seek to rely on the information provided below.

 

Retell Ltd: “Legality of recording conversations with customers: UK Law”

 

“The Rights of Consumers

 

Paragraph 39.

 

A small number of respondents suggested that the Regulations might result in an imbalance between the rights of business and the rights of consumers. They were concerned that the combined effect of the Regulations and the RIP Act [Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000], would be to allow businesses to record their calls with customers, but to deny consumers the right to record their calls with businesses.

 

Paragraph 40.

 

This is not the case. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act does not prohibit individuals from recording their own communications for their own use, because that does not fall within the meaning of "interception" in the Act. Consumers will be able to record their calls with business providing that the recording is for their own use. Nothing in the Act would prevent the consumer from choosing subsequently to disclose or make use of that record in the courts or dispute resolution proceedings.”

 

Links: Legality of recording conversations, UK law on phone recording.

 

Legality of recording conversations, UK law on phone recording.

 

Retell Ltd: “Legality of recording at home”

 

“Can I record telephone conversations on my home phone?

 

Yes. The relevant law, RIPA [Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000], does not prohibit individuals from recording their own communications provided that the recording is for their own use. Recording or monitoring are only prohibited where some of the contents of the communication - which can be a phone conversation or an e-mail - are made available to a third party, ie someone who was neither the caller or sender nor the intended recipient of the original communication …”

 

Link: Recording conversations law. Legality of home phone taps in UK.

 

Retell Ltd:

 

“TELE-RECORDING TAKES BARCLAYS BANK CUSTOMER SERVICE INTO A NEW ERA

 

One of UK's leading banks is setting ever higher standards of customer service thanks to ongoing coaching of Customer Service staff supported by the use of digital tele-recording equipment.”

 

Link: Case studies on improving sales training and customer service

 

 

Financial Ombudsman Service: “The Importance of telephone recordings”

Link: the importance of telephone recordings

 

I hope this helps.

 

A Well Wisher.

[Guest Battleaxe]

Richard Spud, thank you. It is interesting they forgot to edit out the part of their representative telling me that if I say I want the money for a holiday, I would have to repay it sooner. It also has information which was missing off our application questionaire which they did send us after three requests. I have reported this to the ICO and the FOS.

[JonCris]

Battelaxe O'm not surprised.

 

I once received data with 'all' the names blanked out only to find a list of names included in the data which where to be blanked out. I had great.

 

Returning to their editing. Why on earth would they edit the tape. Surely the DJ is, like us, going wonder what they have to hide

[Movingon]

I have no understanding how they are using the DPA to protect themselves from disclosure of their recording. The data subject here is BattleAxe and the conversation is not one with another data subject but with the company - the DPA protects only BattleAxe in this instance.

[Peterbard]

Congratulations Battleaxe on your determination in obtaining at least some limited response to your request for a copy of recorded conversation under the DPA.

 

I suspect that what you have obtained is edited to remove all of the comments of the company’s representative on DPA grounds as you intimate. Notwithstanding this; I read with interest that you intend to submit the edited recording in proceedings. While I would not seek to advise you in this matter, and assuming that proceedings are in the County Court, I suggest that you might consider seeking legal advice as to what a District Judge might prefer to be laid before him/her. Perhaps in addition to the original recording, a verbatim transcript with the omissions clearly marked might be helpful. Furthermore, it may assist the Court that prior to any hearing at which evidence is to be produced, that the other party (i.e. an opponent Company) be given an opportunity to respond to direct questions in response to the filing and serving of a “Request for Clarification and Further Information” under Part 18 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

 

It may be helpful if I explain my understanding that when a Part 18 request is made, that the Respondent is required to reply with a Statement of Truth within a reasonably stipulated period. Failure to respond, I suggest, could give rise to an Order of the Court being made upon the Respondent. I understand that such an order can stipulate that any response is to be used purley for the proceedings before the Court; therefore, I suggest that the matter of confidentiality argued under the DPA might be overridden – you should seek advice on this. In any event, it appears that an admission has been made that a recording exists (otherwise it could not be edited) and the Court may not feel it unreasonable for clarification in writing be sought as to the edited sections.

 

In the circumstances that a recording of a conversation exists made by a Data Subject for instance, a comparison could be made with one provided by a Data Controller - which would satisfy any suspicion of tendentious editing by the Data Controller – and which, I understand, could be produced in evidence. In this regard, I believe it has long been established at common law that an audio recording of conversations between parties is admissible evidence as long as one of the parties to the conversation has knowledge of such a recording is occurring. By way of illustration of my understanding I refer to the following:

 

1. Recorded conversations in person,

 

2. Recorded conversations via telephone apparatus,

 

With reference to 1 above; the facts might be that a customer of business surreptitiously records a conversation between him/her and a representative of the business – perhaps during antecedent negotiations regarding a proposed Regulated Consumer Credit Agreement – and following a dispute the covert recording is produced by the customer in support of statements made by the representative, then I believe that this would be admissible evidence, with no requirement that the representative had been informed prior to any recording occurring.

 

With reference to 2 above; I believe that the legal position is more complicated and I do not seek to elaborate further herein save to say that I understand that an individual is not required to register as a Data Controller under the DPA if electronic records are stored on computers etc for the personal use of an individual. However, the following links may provide some interesting pointers regarding the recording of telephone conversations.

 

DISCLAIMER

 

Any person considering interception, recording or monitoring of telephone calls or e-mails is strongly advised to seek his/her own independent legal advice and should not seek to rely on the information provided below.

 

Retell Ltd: “Legality of recording conversations with customers: UK Law”

 

“The Rights of Consumers

 

Paragraph 39.

 

A small number of respondents suggested that the Regulations might result in an imbalance between the rights of business and the rights of consumers. They were concerned that the combined effect of the Regulations and the RIP Act [Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000], would be to allow businesses to record their calls with customers, but to deny consumers the right to record their calls with businesses.

 

Paragraph 40.

 

This is not the case. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act does not prohibit individuals from recording their own communications for their own use, because that does not fall within the meaning of "interception" in the Act. Consumers will be able to record their calls with business providing that the recording is for their own use. Nothing in the Act would prevent the consumer from choosing subsequently to disclose or make use of that record in the courts or dispute resolution proceedings.”

 

Links: Legality of recording conversations, UK law on phone recording.

 

Legality of recording conversations, UK law on phone recording.

 

Retell Ltd: “Legality of recording at home”

 

“Can I record telephone conversations on my home phone?

 

Yes. The relevant law, RIPA [Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000], does not prohibit individuals from recording their own communications provided that the recording is for their own use. Recording or monitoring are only prohibited where some of the contents of the communication - which can be a phone conversation or an e-mail - are made available to a third party, ie someone who was neither the caller or sender nor the intended recipient of the original communication …”

 

Link: Recording conversations law. Legality of home phone taps in UK.

 

Retell Ltd:

 

“TELE-RECORDING TAKES BARCLAYS BANK CUSTOMER SERVICE INTO A NEW ERA

 

One of UK's leading banks is setting ever higher standards of customer service thanks to ongoing coaching of Customer Service staff supported by the use of digital tele-recording equipment.”

 

Link: Case studies on improving sales training and customer service

 

 

Financial Ombudsman Service: “The Importance of telephone recordings”

Link: the importance of telephone recordings

 

I hope this helps.

 

A Well Wisher.

 

Hi

Very informative

 

The way i understood it was that as far as using recordings in a litigation scenario you have to show that both parties were aware that the call was being recorded, if you didnt it was not admissable is this the general consensus.

 

Peter

[Richard Spud]

As I have intimated with regard to the recording of telephone conversations, the law is somewhat more complicated and further clarification should be sought by other interested parties. However, the source cited [Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000] clearly states:

 

"Paragraph 40.

 

This is not the case. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act does not prohibit individuals from recording their own communications for their own use, because that does not fall within the meaning of "interception" in the Act. Consumers will be able to record their calls with business providing that the recording is for their own use. Nothing in the Act would prevent the consumer from choosing subsequently to disclose or make use of that record in the courts or dispute resolution proceedings.”

 

I suggest that the DTI is the appropriate authority to consult for clarification. Nevertheless; the following case appears to provide authority for recordings of conversations (in person I believe - rather than via the telephone) regarding admissability.

 

VENTOURIS v MOUNTAIN sub nom THE ITALIA EXPRESS (NO.2) (1991)

 

CA (Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR, Balcombe LJ, Staughton LJ) 20/12/91

 

(1992) 1 WLR 887 : (1992) 3 All ER 414 : (1992) 2 Lloyd's Rep 216

 

CIVIL EVIDENCE - CIVIL PROCEDURE

 

ADMISSIBILITY : RELEVANCE : TAPE RECORDINGS : VIDEOTAPE : S.2 : S.10 CIVIL EVIDENCE ACT 1968

 

Where the maker of a recording was not available to testify.

Appeal against a refusal to admit tape recordings under s.10(1)© Civil Evidence Act 1968 which were explained by written out of court statements made by a person who could not be present in court because he was detained abroad.

 

HELD: (1) Tapes made without the knowledge of the person whose statements were being recorded could only be proved by someone who heard the statements being made. (2) Statements made with the speaker's knowledge and intention were admissible under s.2 of the Act. The recorded statements made by the witness himself were admissible. (3) An out of court statement made in a document could be proved by another out of court statement put in evidence under s.2 in which the maker of the statement stated facts concerning the making of the first statement rather than the truth of its contents so that the witness's statement that he had recorded the tapes between himself and other persons and that the tapes were a record of those conversations was sufficient to prove the identity of the tapes for admitting the witness's statements and certain statements of the other persons.

 

Appeal allowed in part.

 

Christopher Clarke QC and Andrew Popplewell instructed by Ince & Co for the defendant. Stephen Tomlinson QC and Stephen Hogmeyer instructed by Hill Taylor Dickinson for the plaintiff.

 

I Hope this helps.

 

A Well Wisher.

[joesoap]

My debt is with MBNA but is being collected/bought by Wescot. I requested the agreement from Wescot but they have failed to deliver after the time limits. I have written to Wescot (on 5/4 and has been signed for but no reply as yet )informing them of the position (see below) and stopped payments. What do I do now, sit and wait? Is it likely they'll go back to MBNA? Do I report Wescot or wait until 10 working days. Just asking to make sure I am on the right track. StoneL has assisted greatly so far.

I'm just back on board after my son's wedding. Came back to find my PC had died on me over-night so had to purchase new, but it's cr@p. I don't like this Vista!

I wrote to you by recorded delivery on 13th February 2007 asking for a copy of the agreement under S77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which is my legal right, enclosing a fee of £1. This letter was delivered and signed for on 14th February 2007 according to the Royal Mail. The Consumer Credit Act allows 12 working days for this request to be carried out before your company enter into a default situation. If the request is not satisfied after a further calendar month, your company commits an offence. These time limits expired on 2nd March 2007 and 2nd April 2007 respectively. I have still not received a copy of my agreement as required by S78 Consumer Credit Act 1974. The time limits have expired and you have now committed a criminal offence under the said act and it is now my intention to report you for this criminal conduct to the appropriate authorities. As an offence of this nature may have an impact on your ability to hold a credit licence, it is important that you give this letter your immediate and prompt attention.

I also understand that under the Act, due to your failure to comply with my statutory request you or any acting agent are unable to enforce an agreement therefore I am ceasing any further payments forthwith and you should repay any payments made to date. Furthermore under the Data Protection Act (D10), you are also denied the authority to pass on any of my personal data. To do so in the circumstances is I understand a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 and also the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) guidelines. Should you ignore my request it would again result in you being further reported to the relevant authorities.

 

I also require that you remove all my data from your files within the next 7 days and look forward to receiving a letter from you within 10 days confirming that you have complied with this request.

I await your rapid response.

[ladybird17]

Hi Joe Soap - hope the wedding went well!

 

Your letter is fine - I just wonder about deleting the word "criminal"prior to offence? As I understand it, the jury is still out as to whether the offence is criminal or civil.

[joesoap]

Hi Joe Soap - hope the wedding went well!

 

Your letter is fine - I just wonder about deleting the word "criminal"prior to offence? As I understand it, the jury is still out as to whether the offence is criminal or civil.

 

As they've already had the letter my head is on the chopping block now. Oh well, there you go. The wedding went better than I could have hoped thanks. I've posted on the C or A thread.

 

IanM