Jump to content
We are now - The National Consumer Service ×


  • Tweets

    No tweets were found.

  • Posts

    • stayed. dead at present. if it remains that way for months then could cost the claimant £100's more in fees to lift the stay. dx  
    • The only thing that could be a problem is the PO Box, I sent the letter to the address without the PO Box, the reply I received didn't mention the LOC just a follow up to my first complaint email. What I might do is resend the SAR to the PO Box as well so they can't say they haven't received it.
    • No problem about establishing a breach of contract and on the basis they have said that it was a computer error, no problem about establishing inaccurate data processing.  Probably worth waiting until the SAR just to see what it brings and any more evidence.  So, if they failed to make the disclosure by the 30-day time limit then that gives you an extra basis for an action . You could start the action now or you could wait until 30 days. I suggest that you wait. I suggest that you make a diary note for 31 days  
    • Thank you They have initiated a refund of the £56 for the trip (which still hasn't been credited). This is all they are prepared to offer plus a £100 voucher for use on their experiences (which we don't want) This still leaves us out of pocket for the parking £15.35, and the 2 x Dart charge £5. As well as the travel to Southend instead of the Queenborough. The extra travel was in total 3.5 hours. I have spent around 2 hours writing letters, email etc. The tickets were purchased for myself and my wife. We haven't received anything from the SAR at the moment. In their email they have admitted an 'admin  error' so would that count as a breach of contract? So in total  Tickets: £56 Parking: £15.36 Dart Charge: £5 Distress & Travel: £150 Total: £226.36 Minus refund being processed of £56 leaves: £170.36 The refund of the tickets has now been credited to my credit card.
    • First draft of my snotty letter to BW Legal. I've got more up my sleeve but might save it for the next one! Dear Sean and Rachael, Thankyou for your “Letter of Claim” which you, somewhat optimistically, sent me on 24th June 2025 on behalf of your client “Premier Park Ltd.” It's baffling that such a reputable law firm with as many as 1.1 stars on Trustpilot would bother trying to extract money resulting from an entirely bogus and spurious claim. Had you even taken 5 minutes to assess the case you would have noticed it contains more holes than a Swiss cheese, but since in last year's accounts you state that you are instructed on a high-volume basis, I doubt any due diligence was performed before blindly sending me your template letter. Consequently, should you choose to pursue your claim in Court having been informed of its futility, I will be asking the court for an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g). However, I would like to extend my thanks to you both for an insight into your business practices. I bet when you were studying for your law degree you never saw yourself aged 51 running a bottom-feeding law firm. I have used your company as an example to my children of what happens if you don't work hard enough at school and I'm pleased to say their work rate has significantly improved in the last few weeks of term. Please cease and desist from contacting me any further on this matter. Yours sincerely,
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 162 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Thanks
        • Like

Manual Intervention - DPA request denied - Legal?


Recommended Posts

I have made a DPA request to my bank including a request for details of manual intervention.

 

My bank have replied saying that as well as the effort needed to investigate being disproportionate (you what?) they are not legally obliged to provide such information.

 

Are they correct in this statement or are they in fact lying?

 

As this request was made under a DPA request should they be forwarded to the IC for further investigation.

 

Need an answer so I can get back to them. The have already wasted 9 days of their 40.

Paul

 

Halifax Status

LBA Sent 11/04/06

1/3 offered by phone 20/04/06 - Rejected

BCT Status

Statements Recieved 31/03/06

Capital One Status

Recieved Lie/Reply 24/04/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lying. In making that statement they have acknowledged receipt of the request.

 

They have 40 days - report them if they miss the deadline.

 

If you do have further contact with them, you can remind them that time is running out...but you are not under any obligation to do so...

 

See the steps I took to get my bank charges back.

Spiceskull v HSBC.

Thank you Consumer Action Group.

Read my blog.

 

Collage001.gif

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Under DPA the bank is only required to provide you with personal information, that is held

1. Electonically,

and

2. Manual information that is stored/kept in a relevant filing system.

 

The disproportionate effort exemption was applied in my case when I made a request for information to a firm of Chartered Surveyors who had been instructed by the Bank.

I contacted the Information Commissioner, who in turn made enquiries to the Surveyors.

Im afraid the Commissioner accepted the Surveyor's excuse.

Due to it's limited resources, the Office of the Information Commissioner appears to be prevented from fulfilling the tasks that they were intended to tackle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely that can't be right? ALL information about you would fall under the DPA remit...

 

If you contact a body, and they make notes, they are taking information you have provided. If they choose to use a different medium (such as wax tablets or even hammer and chisel) for taking this information, it is still information that you are entitled to.

 

If it is going to take extra effort for them to retrieve it...well, serves them right for storing it in an inconvenient format...

 

See the steps I took to get my bank charges back.

Spiceskull v HSBC.

Thank you Consumer Action Group.

Read my blog.

 

Collage001.gif

Alecto, Magaera et Tisiphone: Nemesis on Earth is come.

 

All advice and opinions given by Spiceskull are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

of course they are diddled. you dont think the govt would give outside agencies teeth to actually investigate businesses do you? i hope people are learning a lot about the system from their own dealings with banks, on how banks break the law, and the govt sets up useless bodies to "protect" the consumer that do nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The bank is the Halifax, I have a thread in there with other stuff that isnt relevant to this thread.

 

I sent in the standard DPA request letter and recieved a list of transactions and charges going back to '03 (A/C opened in 01/03) havent sorted them into date order, however in a cover note they informed me about their legal obligation, or lack of, to provide details of manual intervention.

Paul

 

Halifax Status

LBA Sent 11/04/06

1/3 offered by phone 20/04/06 - Rejected

BCT Status

Statements Recieved 31/03/06

Capital One Status

Recieved Lie/Reply 24/04/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

My reading of Smith v Lloyds is that if the data is stored in a box with a lot of other stuff not easily found they do not have to retrieve it. If it is in a filing system, in no matter what format be it paper, microfiche or electronic, it must be disclosed. As always, I am willing to be corrected. 8)

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If all manual data relating to an individual is held chronologically, in a lever arch file with the persons name on the front a data controller does not have to disclose the info as it is not considered by the courts to constitute a relevant filing system

If this same file had dividers for different categories of information, eg health, timekeeping, complaints etc this would be deemed a relevant filing system, and would be caught by the Act.

I know it is ludicrous, Ive already been down that road as a litigant in person against a Bank during a 3 day multi track trial. My case was ongoing at the same time as Durant v FSA

Again Judgment was given in favour of the bank !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, their reply was in writing. Click on the Halifax link in my sig for a full transcript of the letter.

 

I can also scan and email it to the site if anyones interested

Paul

 

Halifax Status

LBA Sent 11/04/06

1/3 offered by phone 20/04/06 - Rejected

BCT Status

Statements Recieved 31/03/06

Capital One Status

Recieved Lie/Reply 24/04/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your point. However, a copy of the notes they must have made is not too difficult. You must phrase the question carefully. If there has been a manual intervention in an automatic process, there must be an electronic record of any such intervention. This must be disclosed.

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 12 years later...

This topic was closed on 03/07/19.

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

Paul

 

Halifax Status

LBA Sent 11/04/06

1/3 offered by phone 20/04/06 - Rejected

BCT Status

Statements Recieved 31/03/06

Capital One Status

Recieved Lie/Reply 24/04/06

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...