I am my own worst enemy sometimes.....i know full well NEVER to phone these people. But on this one occasion i though it could be resolved amicably as an obvious error had been made on thier part. How stupid!!!! I did think about phoning the bank, but to be honest i have not the energy to go through the whole procedure of trying to get my money back, i will just knock it off next months bill and if they want to argue it then fine. I wont be paying by debit card again thats for sure. They took an extra £19.50. They even had the cheek to say 'it is only £19.50 whats your problem' what i wanted to know was how they came to that figure. They were supposed to take £59.14 - £78.64 sounds nothing like what i said, it clearly is nothing like the arrangement and i'm not going to accept as a 'slip of the finger'. God i hate these people, i'm not an angry person but if only i could come face to face with that stupid bi**ch on the phone......

EQUITA - W*****ers. Just had a MASSIVE row with them. They have taken more money from my debit card than what was authorised, they told me i owe them a debt (true i am paying an agreed monthly figure) they said by giving my card details i authorised the payment. Told them they took too much, was told i have to write in. I promise you guys i kept my cool and did not shout...but the stupid bloody woamn kept saying she was going to terminate the call because i was shouting!!!!! So i whispered instead, she then said she does not have to accept that kind of behaviour and hung up!!!! I should of never had called them....they take money and really do not give a s**t. At the moment i am shaking with anger, but i will write to them...not that it will do much good! :mad:

This is what i was going to consider sending with regards to thier payment offer:- Thank you for your email dated 30 July 2007, the contents of which have been noted. I currently find your offer of £50.00 unacceptable considering MBNA have committed a serious breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 and the correspondence received from you highlights this. It seems you are quite aware of your breach hence the offer of payment. This offer does not come anywhere near to resolving the distress you have caused me by phoning, texting and finally passing the number onto a third party, which to date you have failed to provide me with the details of who authorised you to do this. MBNA have taken it upon themselves to breach the Data Protection Act 1998 by logging a number they have not been authorised to use. Yes you state in your letter dated 22 May 2007 that the number was removed on the 22 May 2007, but it seems it wasn’t as Equidebt contacted me on that very number some 29 days later as the alleged debt was not sold on until 20 June 2007. After pursuing this matter it has now come to light through your admittance that you didn’t remove this number at all. My question is why did MBNA find it necessary to blatantly lie? I’m sure you are aware that a breach of this act means the offences can be taken to the Magistrates Courts (where there is a maximum fine of £5,000) or to a Crown Court, where unlimited fines are possible. If you wish to resolve this matter out of court and put a sensible offer to me then I am willing to co-operate, yet please bear in mind I will be taking into account the distress you have caused. If you are not willing to resolve this amicably then you will leave me no choice but to inform the Information Commissioner and invite the registered owner of the number to start proceedings. I look forward to hearing on how you intend to resolve this matter. Your thoughts please, as i would like to get this off soon.

Update - Not been here lately so fell a bit behind. MBNA informed me they removed the mobile number, as requested on the 22 May. Yet they did not 'sell' the debt to Equidebt until the 22 June, so clearly they had not removed the number at all as they passed it on to Equidebt. I wroteto MBNA regarding this an this is thier response:- http://img32.picoodle.com/img/img32/9/7/21/f_mbnanumberlm_1fe272e.jpg Clearly not happy with this i replied back saying:- Dear Joanne Johnson. Thank you for your letter dated 16 July 2007 regarding my email sent 6 July 2007. You state again that the telephone number in question was removed from your system on the 22 May 2007 so I wish you explain to me how Equidebt became holders of this number. As you have unlawfully sold the debt on Equidebt it could only have been MBNA that passed on the information, which means you did not remove the number from your system as stated as the alleged debt was not sold on until the 22 June 2007. You say that the Data Protection Act requirement as been met as where you know a customer’s telephone number is still valid and it was provided by them to service the account, then in effect the personal data you are processing is accurate. I did not give you the number to service the account you took it upon yourselves to log it without permission, you have also been told this IS NOT my number and that the owners of the number are within their rights right to take legal action to prevent such calls, which may include (but will not be limited to) a court injunction. So you are in fact still in breach of the Data Protection Act 1998. I note you also state that you are perfectly within your rights to contact a customer via telephone when the customer is no longer working with MBNA, well if they are no longer working with you then they are no longer a customer which means you do not have any right at all to contact them and if you continue to do will constitute to harassment. Yesterday this was thier response:- From: Customer Advocate’s Office, MBNA Account: XXXX XXXX XXXX 9258 Thank you for your recent email regarding the above account. I was sorry to learn that you feel we have not fulfilled the actions outlined in our previous response. I have now concluded my investigation into your complaint and would like to take this opportunity to outline my findings. I note that in our previous response to you, we agreed to remove the telephone number ******* and you have since received calls from Equidebt to this number. I can confirm that we suspended calling to the number given; however, once the sale to Equidebt was completed, the number was reinstated. Under the Data Protection Act we have an obligation to ensure that the personal data we hold is accurate. We are therefore obliged to delete and amend details to ensure that this is the case. Although we agreed to remove the number, it appears that it was still considered a valid contact for you, and so was passed to the agents. As you have now made me aware that the number is not registered to you, I have contacted the agents and asked them to remove it from their records. Under the OFT guidelines and Banking Code we are expected to ensure that our vendors also adhere to the regulatory guidelines that we do. Therefore, the telephone number will be removed as it is inaccurate. Until information of this type is received, we can suspend calls unless we receive no response to our written communications with you and the vendors must also adhere to this instruction. As you are no longer a customer of MBNA, I can only assume that the vendors did not receive a response to their written communications with you and are therefore permitted to contact you by telephone provided the number is valid. Whilst I cannot agree that we have breached the Data Protection Act, the number should have been deleted in full from the account following our previous letter to you and I apologise unreservedly that this has not happened. As a gesture of our regret, I have arranged for a cheque in the amount of £50.00 to be sent to you shortly under separate cover. I trust that you will find this response satisfactory. Should you have any further queries please contact my colleague Kate Baldwin, on 01244 672915 (Monday to Friday, 9am to 5pm). If we do not hear from you within eight weeks of the date of this letter we will assume that the matter is closed. Yours sincerely Joanne Johnson Customer Advocate Office Manager Firstly they can shove thier 50 quid, paying me off so i dont take DPA non-compliance any further, i dont think so....well not for £50.00 anyway. I am going to repsond but i need a few ideas. At this moment in time i am not too keen on going to court, as i have other court matters to deal with. Actually i have never said they WILL be taken to court i just couldnt promise that it would not happen. All ideas for my next letter much appreciated.

Have you sent them an S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)? Under the SAR / Data Protection 1998 they cannot omit data like they can under the Consumer Regs or CCA 1974. SAR them this automatically turns out a fully executed copy of the agreement...if there is one! They cannot deny sending you all the information held on you under a SAR. You will find template letters in the template section

.....................

GE Money have repaid all the charges not the interest though! Well i say all of them they have not sent me anymore statements since to say they have applied anymore, i'm SAR'ing CL today so we shall see exectly what they have applied.

One of the points that will be going in the defence is an application to have their claim struck out as an abuse of process based on the OC's non compliance & the failure to notify me of assignment

Laiste i very good, she might be hearing from me yet!

Thats a good defence...she does it again! Before i send the defence i will post it up here it seems CL are time wasters. Did you SAR CL or did Laiste advise you otherwise?

Subscribing.....You are aware of my issue with CL will keep you informed.

Going to make things messy for CL....watch this space!

Yes i think i will SAR CL at least that will show me when GE Money assigned it to them and when they informed me...that is of course if they followed the correct procedure!!! the good thing about an SAR is they cannot pursue the claim until they have complied and it shows all activity, so should show if they have been telling porkies!

These are the particulars of the claim:- The Claimant's claim is for the sum of £452.02 being monies due from the defendant to the claimant under a regulated credit agreement between the defendant and GE Capitak Bank Ltd under ref *****9029 and assigned to the claimant on the 18th July 2007, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The defendant has failed to make payment in accordance with the terms of the agreement and a default notice has been served upon the defendant pursuant to section 87(1) of the consumer credit act 1974 Pursuant to clause 7 of the agreement, the claimant also claims contractual interest at a rate of 26.47% per annum from the date of these proceedings to the date of judgement, or sooner payment, accruing at a daily rate of £0.38 They have not informed me they assigned it to CL, they did not issue a default notice, i cant agree to clause 7 of the agreement with regards to contractual interest as i have not seen clause 7. (unless i am being really blind and it is on the 'agreement' somewhere)

It seems from the claim form GE assigned it to the claimant CL on the 18th July, so in those 5 days CL have not bothered to contact me they have just gone straight in with the claim. It may be worth CCA'ing CL and asking them for the Deed of Assignment. I have just sent off the AOS online

Should i now CCA CL? What about the SAR?

I will have a look....this claim has also appeared out of the blue...one minute GE are looking into my complaint the next this claim...they never even told me they had assigned it to CL. On the face of my application / agreement some may say it is valid but my main argument at the moment is failure to resend the agreement when issuing a replacement card. It is not a case of getting a claim and accepting it, i believe now in challenging everything the sols and creditors say...what have we got to lose

Another thing i have just noticed. The claim form said the Claimant is CL Finance. I have never ever had any dealing with CL only with GE Money...surely the claimant should be GE Money....surely this is also a dispute this on the ground of never having any correspondance from CL and dont know who the hell they are!

I have been in dispute with GE Money over a Debenhams account. I put my CCA request in on the 16 April 2007 they responded on the 23rd April (quickest response ever!!!!) I believe the agreement is improperly executed, as it does not contain the creditors signature, has the wrong account number on the top, does not have the credit limit and also states it is an application form as well as an agreement, it contains all my application details (i understand this may not make it improperly executed but there is a clause in the act that may make it be, will come back to that later). They have in all correspondance refered to the document as an application form. I queried the fact with GE Money / Debenhams that they have put the wrong account number on the top, they informed me this is not wrong it was the original card number, apprantly i reported the card lost or stolen so they issued a new card, thats why the card details i have now are different. This is when i asked them why had they not complied with section 85 of the act, they infomed me they dont need to issue a copy of the agreement when issuing a replacement card! They have not issued a default notice and whilst the account was / is in dispute i was being pursued by Viking Collection Services who had been informed of the dispute. There was unlawful charges but they have refunded these. They have been filing erroneous data with the CRA's In the latest letter GE Money have started refering to the account as a TOP SHOP account. I have never had a TOPSHOP account, it is Debenhams i am disputing. I have not put in a SAR as yet, but now the claim form has come i shall do so, however, i want to make sure the SAR is sent and signed for before i send off the defence. The sols are Howard Cohen & Co do i SAR them or GE Money? The issue date is 23 July, so i have 28 days to either file an acknowledgement and file defence within 28 days or file a defence. I will send off the acknowledgement and prepare my defence. This is where i need your help.... The agreement is below and letters from GE are below http://img29.picoodle.com/img/img29/9/7/24/f_CAGagreemenm_a312f4d.jpg http://img29.picoodle.com/img/img29/9/7/24/f_GEletter1m_708a989.jpg http://img35.picoodle.com/img/img35/9/7/24/f_GEletter1ofm_b6ee653.jpg Remainder of above letter below http://img38.picoodle.com/img/img38/9/7/24/f_GEletter2ofm_f3a14fa.jpg

Write to the Sols say thank for your letter and yes i will see you in court! They are all nothing but hot air:D

It seems they dont all follow suit. I wrote to all three with regards to MW. Call credit is the only one that has advised me they are going to surpress the information for the time being. Now this is the worrying bit....I didn't actually ask Call Credit for my file, as i saw MW had processed data on both Equifax and Experian i assumed it would be on Call Credit too so instead of applying for my credit file i just went straight in with the letter...ok i was winging it slightly but thier response confirms the data was there and they have surpressed it. The original letter to Call Credit contained just my name and current address (a standard letter) it did not have DOB or any other info required for a file....so what the hell are they doing sending info out to me without fully checking my identity first!

Yes i had the same reply back from Experian with regards to Marshall Ward yet Call Credit have suppressed all information.

Improperly executed as well as being a fake!

Caution noted....but surely this would be even more reason to get the file cleared, they have never ever had a signed agreement so if they do produce one...well we know what that is called! So they sent you an agreement after writing off your debt...how are you pursuing the small matter of the 'reconstruction' i assume you also never signed an agreement.

Pointing her your way There is no default listed at the moment, the file says 'Q' Query.