Swift Advances Plc?

[enaid]

Re: Swift Advances Plc?

Am sorry I can't help with this Sparkie, would be a fool to say I could. I do wish you all the best and come what may you have done yourself proud.
Enaid x

[TINKEY2]

Re: Swift Advances Plc?

Go get them Sparkie......BEST OF LUCK!!! not that you need it.

And they thought you had gone all quiet on them NEVER

TT:beagle:

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift Advances Plc?

This shows that the unlicensed trading name SWIFT ADVANCES wrote to our First Mortgage holder and deceived them into consenting to the charge on our property......and as you see requested to charged in the name of SWIFT ADVANCES.............But it was registered in Swift Advances plc's name........this again shows another criminal offence of deception
obtaining permission in one name and then using another........just you try obtaining something under a name belonging to someone else ...bearing in mind The Trading name of Swift Advances belonged to Swift Finance UK Ltd in 2007 until November 2009
sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift Advances Plc?

This is our First Witness Statement the second is much more meatier...........Swift Advances plc have all this


Sparkie



1. Due to Swift Advances plc failing to fully comply with a previous Subject Data Access Request (SDAR) made by me in June 2009 or thereabouts under The Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA1998), for all relevant data held by them on myself, and my partner , I submitted a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) for adjudication as to if Swift Advances plc had indeed failed to fully comply with my SDAR by withholding information from me/us.


2. The ICO reached the conclusion that Swift Advances plc had not fully complied with said request, and advised me to submit a new SDAR to Swift Advances plc, I did this on the 14th Feruary 2011, attached at this point is a copy of the said SDAR as Document 1.


3. To date Swift Advances plc have failed to comply with this further SDAR, nor have they even acknowledged receipt of said request, but have cashed the cheque of £10, the fee for such request, I therefore respectfully asks the Court to make an
order under section 7 of the DPA 1998, for Swift Advances plc to comply with the SDAR shown as Document 1, as it is clear that Swift Advances plc have no intention of freely complying with said request.


4. Attached as Document 2 is a further letter from the Applicant to Swift Advances plc regarding this request.


5. The ICO case worker Mr XXXX, who investigated my complaint advised that, the ICO has made it clear in correspondence with Swift Advances plc, in relation to my complaint and subsequent investigation by the ICO, of the failure of Swift Advances plc to fully comply with my first SDAR, that the information requested does form part of the data that is required to be disclosed under the DPA 1998, and yet they still fail to comply with this said 2nd request.


6. I therefore humbly asks the Court to make the order an Ex Parte Order, as the data is being deliberately withheld, despite being legally obliged to supply it, and that Swift Advances plc have had more than the sufficient reasonable time
specified in the DPA 1998 to supply requested data and information, had they required more time I/we should have at least been advised/notified that more time was required to collect all he data requested, no such advise was ever received.


7. I believe that the withholding of such documents and information, could,
possibly infringe other Statutes and Legislation, but cannot be certain unless and until the SDAR is complied with, and the data and information is examined


8. To assist the Court in reaching its decision, I copy at this point and provide the relevant section of the DPA 1998 that gives the Court the power to make the order requested, and wish to draw the Courts attention to the heavy typed parts.


Section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998
“(8) Subject to subsection (4), a data controller shall comply with a request under this section promptly and in any event before the end of the prescribed period beginning with the relevant day.
(9) If a court is satisfied on the application of any person who has made a request under the foregoing provisions of this section that the data controller in question has failed to comply with the request in contravention of those provisions, the court may order him to comply with the request.

(10 )In this section—
· “prescribed” means prescribed by the [F3 Secretary of State] by regulations;
· “the prescribed maximum” means such amount as may be prescribed;
· “the prescribed period” means forty days or such other period as may be prescribed;
· “the relevant day”, in relation to a request under this section, means the day on which the data controller receives the request or, if later, the first day on which the data controller has both the required fee and the information referred to in subsection (3).

9. I therefore humbly ask the Court to use the power available to it to make the Order applied for, a Draft of which is attached, as I am at my wits end as to how else can I make Swift Advances plc supply this information which is so vital without this Order being made.
Statement of Truth.

The Applicant believes that the statement above is to the best of his knowledge and belief accurate and true.

Draft Order



1. It is ordered that Swift Advances plc of Arcadia House, The Drive, Warely Hill Business Park, Brentwood, Essex, CM13 3BE fully comply with the Subject Data Access Request made by Mr XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX (The Applicant) under the Data Protection 1998.

2. That this order be complied with, within 7 days of receipt of this Order.

3. That unless this Order is fully complied with, the possession case Number XXXXXX that the withheld information requested is of vital importance to, that case shall be struck out without the need any further order of the Court being made.

4. Furthermore that a Contempt of Court charge may be considered being brought against Swift Advances plc.




By Order of

[TINKEY2]

Re: Swift Advances Plc?

Excellent as usual Sparkie!!!

One bit in there that gets me STATEMENT OF TRUTH

Swift do not know the meaning!!!

Lie cheat manipulate YES truth NO

Do you think someone should explain the meaning to them?

TT

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift Advances Plc?

Excellent as usual Sparkie!!!

One bit in there that gets me STATEMENT OF TRUTH

Swift do not know the meaning!!!

Lie cheat manipulate YES truth NO

Do you think someone should explain the meaning to them?

TT

Hi TINKEY2
All I can say to this is......:amen:
Sparkie

[TINKEY2]

Re: Swift Advances Plc?

Hi TINKEY2
All I can say to this is......:amen:
Sparkie

I think you maybe right!!!

I think their next computer systems (they won`t be around that long I know) should be named after ducks!! sitting ducks!! cant find a duck,

maybe horses then flogging a dead 1 :deadhorse:

Or pigs MIGHT :flypig:
TT

[Ihaterbs]

Re: Swift Advances Plc?

Good luck Sparkie. Fingers crossed the Judge will see through all of Swift's smoke screens.

Speak to you later.

Regards

[jumper999]

Re: Swift Advances Plc?

Lets hope sparkie comes back with good news and he can have a relaxing weekend, lord knows he deserves it............
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Just a quick question but has pt2537 left this forum aint seen him around lately?

[Dougal16T]

Re: Swift Advances Plc?

Morning all,

VERY BEST OF LUCK TO SPARKIE - IF ANYONE DESERVES IT HE DOES!!

GO GET 'EM SPARKIE......

Thinking of you and yours......

Best wsihes to Sparkie and everyone

Dougal :beagle:

[nelliewops]

Re: Swift Advances Plc?

It's a bit late I know, but very best of luck from me too for today Sparkie.............I'm keeping everything crossed for you. You deserve success after all your hard work - as usual! xxx

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift Advances Plc?

After attending Court today, I had to withdraw my application due to minor procedural problems. That is the hurdle of being an LIP …not knowing the fine procedural rules

1..The Court Office gave me incorrect information in that on the application form N244 I had left all the boxes at the Top r/h corner blank, they advised that a case number should be shown and told me to use the possession proceedings case number, which I filled in at the counter in pen.

This was incorrect Judge Halbert said that he is bound by CPR’s and a Data Protection Application cannot be made under a possession claim number, and 2

2..I had used the wrong Court form to make said application the form should have been an N7.

He asked if I had paid for the application and I said yes Your Honour £80, he then said under the circumstances, he would try his utmost to have that fee refunded, but could not guarantee it.


I have now got to start again and resubmit another POC, meanwhile I will be contacting the ICO with regard to my second complaint and ask them to speed things up and take enforcement action against Swift Advances plc, to supply the information, the ICO say I am entitled to.

It is stalemate at present…..but I will get the info one way or another, I can say from the Barristers reaction before Court I believe Swift Advances plc are petrified of being forced to disclose the underwriting sheets especially having evidence of Mark White swearing under oath they do not pay commission AT ALL

The truth “will out" maybe not now but it will

Sparkie

[Celestine]

Re: Swift Advances Plc?

That is such bad luck Sparkie. Sorry to hear that you've been held up with such a frustrating technicality.

Keep batting on, you're doing a great job. :seagull:

[Sparkie1723]

Re: Swift Advances Plc?

That is such bad luck Sparkie. Sorry to hear that you've been held up with such a frustrating technicality.

Keep batting on, you're doing a great job. :seagull:

Thank you Celestine,

That is how LIP's can come unstuck on the very minor technicalities, I must say that Judge Halbert is one of the best kind of Judges one can come across he is a very very fair man who treats you with respect, but will jot allow ANYONE and that incudes Barristers to "get way" with anything, unfortunately, I did not know the procedures, and I hold my hands up for not delving deep enough into them, I have learned from my experience and will be sure next time to put this experience to use.

There will be a next time.

Thank you to everyone for their support .......I do hope it continues ......if I thought for one minute Swift Advances plc were fair and were right .I would give up now ...but there is not a chance of that, because I know they are wrong and I WILL pove it sooner or later..........they know I am right.....and I know I am.

My next move is to get the Cheshire Police Fraud Squad to commence investigations under my report of an alleged crime ...to which I have a Crime Number allocated and I will now feed them with all the extra information I have now amassed on top of what I have already supplied them.

A criminal investigation will not affect any civil proceedings. I hope the trolls in the employ of the company in question make note of this

Sparkie

[jumper999]

Re: Swift Advances Plc?

Well even though things did not go as you hoped sparkie look at the brighter side at least you have an opportunity to correct whatever went wrong and you never know more skeletons may fall out of the cupboard which I am sure enough have lol.........

The battle is not over yet, yes I know its hard and tough but together we can do, we just have to believe in ourselves and we will all get their in the end. Great work sparkie and this will pay off some way or another.

Don't beat yourself too much about what happened, you have come too far to be put off but little technicalities like what happened today.