PPI and Court

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

but why should they get off complying with a lawful request hell they did not even comply in 2008 so my question to you all is why have they not complied laws are there for this very reason and what is the point in the government putting those acts in place if businesses do not comply with them seems a waste of taxpayers money

[WendyB]

Re: PPI and Court

Have they actually offered you a figure on Loan 1? I seem to remember they have but tbh have lost the will to read all the way back through again.If they have, how different was it from the figure Bill, Marshy and Turbo came up with?

I also seem to remember you were fairly happy with things until this idea of the SAR came up again.

What will you actually gain if you go to Court with this? Seems to me you could stand to lose more than you are gaining, just over a few sheets of paper? Sorry PF but this is beginning to remind me of those CCA arguments where people get a bit blinkered then it all goes down the toilet...

Just my opinion mate and please don't take offence, but you know me, I tell it how I see it.

[di30]

Re: PPI and Court

Hi, just got back now - not read through all details but did you come to any conclusions on this after in regards of non compliant via ICO?

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

Marshallka,

I have it in writing from the FOS that the bank are dealing with it and I will be hearing from them within a week.

That and my DSAR letter with the proof of postage aswell as the RM record of the bank signing for the DSAR is more than enough evidence to get a court order to comply.

And that will be a quicker route than the ICO.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Turbo,

Maybe, but I am not taking my complaint to court merely seeking an order for them to comply with my lawful DSAR.

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

Marshallka,

This does indeed all revolve around the first loan and yes I am in agreement with the other eight.

But why would they not comply with what to them is a simple Subject Access Request after all they must process many thousands each year.

I sent a letter to the FOS last week informing them that the banks time for compliance is fast running out and that they had not even presented the CHQ for payment.

I have heard nothing from the FOS OK data compliance is nothing to do with them ,but as I was at deadlock with the bank and they refused to take my calls and was told to communicate via the FOS and they would forward any communication on to them.

I have indeed made what the bank would consider a simple request and they cant even get that right.

I just have this gut feeling that no settlement was given on the first loan and if that is the case it is my right to know about it and furthermore if that is the case not only would the redress on the first loan be wrong so would all the others as to much would have been paid on the first loan.

They have hounded me with countless DCA,s over these past 2 years it is indeed fitting that I should be supplied with the info I requested in the time-frame set by law.

I do not for one minute believe that any judge would agree with the way this bank has dealt with this complaint or indeed the FOS for that matter given that they originally said the banks first redress figure was correct and fair which we have proved was not.

This is not a question of damages but fair redress under the treating customers fairly principal for which they have already had 2.5 yrs to get right.

Something is being withheld and I will try my damnedest to find out starting with another phone call to the bank and FOS in the morning.

Off my soapbox now lol

PF---be careful old mate--as Wendy said---Principles don't pay Bills

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

From the DPA 1998

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.

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.

[marshallka]

Re: PPI and Court

Good luck on this then PF....I have no idea how you would force all the details of the first loan and also whether you can prove that no rebate was given but you must know what you are doing and have faith in what you are doing too. I really have no knowledge of courts and agreements and the ICO and I was only asked to take a look at your figures (which I know from reading over at the other site) you thought were VERY wrong when in fact they were correct so I just wish you luck again.

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

Marshallka,

This does indeed all revolve around the first loan and yes I am in agreement with the other eight.

But why would they not comply with what to them is a simple Subject Access Request after all they must process many thousands each year.

I sent a letter to the FOS last week informing them that the banks time for compliance is fast running out and that they had not even presented the CHQ for payment.

I have heard nothing from the FOS OK data compliance is nothing to do with them ,but as I was at deadlock with the bank and they refused to take my calls and was told to communicate via the FOS and they would forward any communication on to them.

I have indeed made what the bank would consider a simple request and they cant even get that right.

I just have this gut feeling that no settlement was given on the first loan and if that is the case it is my right to know about it and furthermore if that is the case not only would the redress on the first loan be wrong so would all the others as to much would have been paid on the first loan.

They have hounded me with countless DCA,s over these past 2 years it is indeed fitting that I should be supplied with the info I requested in the time-frame set by law.

I do not for one minute believe that any judge would agree with the way this bank has dealt with this complaint or indeed the FOS for that matter given that they originally said the banks first redress figure was correct and fair which we have proved was not.

This is not a question of damages but fair redress under the treating customers fairly principal for which they have already had 2.5 yrs to get right.

Something is being withheld and I will try my damnedest to find out starting with another phone call to the bank and FOS in the morning.

Off my soapbox now lol

[marshallka]

Re: PPI and Court

PF, what are you hoping to gain here from Co-op... obviously I came in late here and you have something in mind and you are expecting damages or something via the courts. If you think back your redress's WERE correct in the first place (according to both myself and Turbo now) and although you have gained extra interest (as it has gone on longer) obviously I am missing something in all of this....

As I see it, you made a complaint and they eventually offered redress on most of the loans (except 1) and the redress's WERE correct at the time. You thought you were due lots more back than you were offered and I was asked to have a look at it also. We then came to some agreement (between ourselves) that this redress wasin fact correct (except the first loan which they do not have any paperwork for) and now you are thinking of taking this to court? I am completely lost on this TBH and must obviously be a little backward in all of this.

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

Turbo,

Yes I could do that, but as you have guessed I am a hard man that has been ripped off many times before I found these great sites and that just aint gona happen again.

Why when Richard Slater at the FOS said in black and white that the request is being dealt with by Marc Davis and I will have that information within a week am I still waiting.

The bank is playing cat and mouse with me and the FOS, They are holding infomation on that first loan I know it they say they do not have records so if that was the case how do they know that 14 payments were made ? when I thought it was 15.

And lets not forget going back to the beginning they sent all the agreements bar the first one saying they did not hold that agreement, but on making a second request via a letter some one at the bank cocked up and sent it out.

indeed these mistakes on there part happen when more than one bank worker deals with a complaint, and is the reason the FSA want one person dealing with a complaint throughout.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
perhaps I should post up all the letters i have sent the bank because I have made repeated requests for information and every time there letters do not address the points I made
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Just sticking this here for reading this evening:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/contents
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Will be back later dinnertime now

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

FFS--PF

If more than 2 weeks--accept the offer & give you Closure

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

Only problem with making a complaint to the ICO is it will take at least a year before they look into it and given that this complaint has already taken over 2 years I do not think that is an option now.

I think I would be better off forcing the Co-op to full comply via the court, it will cosat me nothing to do that as I am on disability benefits so there are no fees also as they have not complied in the given time as per the DPA 1999 the law is on my side.

This may also force the bank to deal with my complaint justly as it will show that I mean business and are not prepared to be messed about anymore.

One does now wonder what are they trying to hide and if they are indeed hiding something the courts will get this out of them.

What you think.

I can get it all ready on Monday and fill it in court on Tuesday.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
I can state that this complaint has taken 2 yrs thus far and that is the reason I have used the court instead of the ICO as that would further hinder the complaint by another year at least.

[marshallka]

Re: PPI and Court

No---they returned his cheque in 2008 & refused to effectively treat it as a formal DSAR

He will have to make a complaint to the ICo then if they do not conform to the request.

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

No---they returned his cheque in 2008 & refused to effectively treat it as a formal DSAR

[marshallka]

Re: PPI and Court

Not on about this Marshy--isn't it a "law" that they have to respond within 40 days---ie 14/11/2010 in this case?

Ok, but how long ago did PF receive his first SAR request. Did he make one before as they may not respond if he did and although he thinks that items were missing then he really should have complained to the ICO then I would think... don't really know much about what was requested before (if it in fact was) and what he thinks was missing from the request?

Complaints about data protection policy - ICO


What about repeated or unreasonable requests?

The Data Protection Act does not limit the number of subject access requests an individual can make to any organisation. However, it does allow some discretion when dealing with requests that are made at unreasonable intervals. The Act says that you are not obliged to comply with an identical or similar request to one you have already dealt with, unless a reasonable interval has elapsed between the first request and any subsequent ones.