I'm very surprised your vets initially refused to let you have the x-rays. The RCVS Code of Professional Conduct states: 13.6 The Data Protection Act 1998 gives anyone the right to be informed about any personal data relating to themselves on payment of an administration charge. At the request of a client, veterinary surgeons must provide copies of any relevant clinical and client records, including radiographic images and similar documents. As regards the quality of the images, does the practice use a digital processor? If so, ask them to save the images onto a disc for you. It's easily done.

We will write a prescription for one month of meds, but allow it to be repeated x number of times up to the time of the next check. I think it's reasonable to charge a fee for a written prescription - we charge £10.20. When pet owners compare the price paid at their surgery for prescription medication to the price they can purchase for online, I can understand the initial reaction is vets being greedy and over-inflating their prices. Yes, POMs, food etc. are marked up - the same as all retail products are. The overheads of an online pharmacy are a fraction of those of a bricks-and-mortar veterinary surgery: for a start, we have to keep a large range of meds in - some of them quite expensive - just in case an animal needs these during the course of the day, whereas your online guys will keep a more limited range, but they have the advantage of being able to bulk-buy - a small independent surgery just doesn't have the buying power to negotiate to match these prices. To illustrate this, I've seen online shops selling drugs out at less than we can buy them in for from the wholesalers. We also have the costs of staff - veterinary surgeons, veterinary nurses, auxiliary nurses, receptionists; providing a 24 hour service so we're there for you at 3am on Christmas Day or whenever; surgical facilities, laboratory facilities (the cost of the equipment honestly would make your eyes water); insurance (in case we get sued)....the list goes on. So yeah, products and services are marked up, and I see no reason to apologise for this. I do object to the claim above about vets "trying every trick in the book to string out treatment". I've worked in practice for 13 years and I've probably worked with over 50 vets in that time, and I can honestly say this never, ever, EVER happens - it would be completely contrary to the declaration that all vets undertake that their "constant endeavour will be to ensure the health and welfare of animals" committed to their care. Yes there are a variety of blood tests that can be run, but a full panel is more expensive to run and thus more expensive for the pet owner, so it makes sense to use a process of elimination - in a lot of cases the answers can be provided at minimal cost to the owner. Believe me, if we ran a full general health profile plus all the additional options in each case, we'd get a lot more complaints!

I keep getting spam texts off Brisk Buck offering me the exciting opportunity to take out one of their very reasonable loans. This text comes through as 'BriskBuck', does not give a number, cannot be replied to, and does not give the option to unsubscribe (not convinced I subscribed in the first place). It does, however, contain a link to their website. Unless I'm missing something, their website has absolutely no way of contacting them. There's no email address, phone number, postal address, and I can't see any registration details e.g. consumer credit license etc. They also claim "We are the UK's leading payday loan provider". Really?? Please tell me these dodgy shysters are breaking a tonne of rules? I've reported them to the ICO, on one of those form-filling & box-ticking jobs, but I'd love to know if there are other bodies I should be reporting this to? Yes, call me petty, but PDL companies caused me a lot of upset in the past and if I have the tiniest chance to contribute towards getting them stopped then I'll take it.

Made a small donation - like others I do wish I could afford more. Sincere condolences - Martin's good work lives on in this forum.

Thanks for the suggestion, I'd never thought of a communal area. As it's only one flat (the upstairs flat is owned separately and has no access to the garden) I'd always assumed the garden is entirely private and not communal.

Thanks for your reply, I agree what you suggest is a good way of phrasing it. Trouble is she's quite a stroppy/pushy woman and a few years ago when I tried to discuss the fact that she'd thrown away some used gro-bags from the garden despite me telling her I didn't want her to (sounds petty, I know, but they were my property and I was going to dig them into the borders!) she got quite annoyed by me saying so and insisted that she had a right to ensure the property was maintained reasonably! I just left it as I didn't want an argument, but I know that if I do try to have a "quiet word" as suggested she will try to argue back, so I feel I need to know my legal rights so that I can back myself up.

I live alone in a ground floor flat and have been here for about 5 years. During that time I've had an OK relationship with my landlady - she lives locally and has in the past called round as she's walking the dog etc., and certain repairs that should have been carried out haven't been completed, but for the sake of maintaining a cordial relationship I've put up with this. I always pay my rent on time, I'm in stable employment, I don't have wild parties, and the flat upstairs and next door have been up for rent many many times during the period of my residency, so generally I think my landlady's fortunate to have me as a tenant! However I have one issue that keeps re-occurring and it's really upsetting me. My landlady often enters my garden - this is a back garden and I feel this is a major invasion of my privacy. My bedroom has patio doors out on to the garden, and I used to leave these open on the rare occasion we had warm weather, until one Saturday afternoon when I was resting (naked!) on my bed only to find my landlady and her husband in the garden outside my open doors! She often puts my bins out, moves my garden furniture and generally tidies up in the garden. She rang me at work a couple of days ago and mentioned that the night before she'd been "sweeping up" in my garden - whilst I was inside the flat! Is she allowed to do this? Surely I rent the garden area as much as the building itself, and as this is impinging on my privacy isn't this contrary to my right to quiet enjoyment? I am going to have to ask her to desist, but I first need to know where I stand legally, so if anyone could advise me I'd be really grateful. (She also does things like clean my front door - again whilst I'm inside the flat! )

Totally agree Brigadier, however would the Police care? Having read other threads on here, the rozzers seem to take the line that "you owe the money, tough!" I am, however, going to contact the OFT & TS. My concern (which I'm sure is shared by others receiving these disgraceful texts) is that I am in debt, and if I kick up a fuss I might discover just how low these jokers will go. If I'm trying to get them to accept fairly low payments (being all that I can afford) they're going to make it even more awkward for me if I drop them in the proverbial over this text. Ah well, I suppose if I do give in to the fear I'm playing right into their hands, as it's that kind of attitude that makes them money.

Thanks all for your replies. I'm encouraged that you think it's worth reporting to TS & the OFT - I'll let you know if I manage to get anywhere. I really resent the intimidatory tone of the text. I worry that someone who might not be able to see through it for the crock of wotsit that it is could be very upset by this.

Yesterday, I received this text message: REMOVAL: lancslucy, I am due to CALL to your address NOW! To STOP ACTION call 01617381201 to make a token payment TODAY! Tyson McKenzie . CASE ID 6**** I can't reply as there is no 'valid recipient' - it doesn't come from a number that's displayed, just REMOVAL. Suffice to say, no-one turned up. I'm not the sort of person who is easily intimidated, and I spend enough time reading CAG posts to know this joker has no power to enter my home or seize goods. However I do find the tone of this message needlessly threatening. I know it doesn't explicitly state they are attending to seize goods, but that it certainly what is implied. Surely the name of the company should be displayed? I don't know who it's from or who this Tyson McKenzie is. I am in debt, but that doesn't justify some anonymous company texting me like this. Has anyone else had anything similar? Isn't this a breach of the guidelines that DCAs are supposed to work to?

I have received a letter addressed to me, marked private and confidential, but to my work address. It was handed to me by my line manager this morning. Aside from the issues surrounding my employers opening all post received, regardless of whether it's marked personal, private and confidential or whatever, I am absolutely fuming as I believe this was a deliberate move to embarrass or shame me into paying whatever it is they claim I owe. I don't actually know which debt this relates to, as my finances are in a very tangled mess, but my plan over the next few weeks is to look into the various options such as debt management plans, IVAs etc. Therefore I haven't so far entered into any correspondence with this particular DCA. However, whether or not I've replied to their letters sent to my home address, surely there is a data protection issue here? They know this is my business address, and I would only ever have provided it in order to prove my employment to my original creditor. If anyone can advise me whether this tactic is acceptable or not, I'd be really grateful. My priority is to stop this company writing to me at work again and causing me further embarrassment.

Smile. And yes I have proof I cancelled the card - they emailed back and acknowledged the cancellation! I just cannot understand how they could authorise the payments. It's not even as if it was just one compnay trying it on with small amounts, which PDLs have been known to do. £425 is a massive amount, especially when there is a balance of zero and no overdraft in place! I've had my card declined when for tiny, tiny sums - so why did they suddenly decide to pay £425 to this company? ridiculous. I just wanted to hear that other people felt that I was right in what I thought, that these payments had been made after I had withdrawn my authority and consent, and therefore should not stand.

I think the payment was made by debit card - there was no direct debit ever arranged for Month End Money. My bank statement doesn't specify however, but there is no direct debit arranged for them and the one that was in place for the other PDL was cancelled a few weeks before. My card was cancelled online and so a record exists of this and also an email confirmation of this request. I haven't received a new debit card as my bank won't issue a new one while my "unauthorised overdraft" exists. So basically if I can prove I cancelled the card, is it true that my bank did not have my authority to make payment? What if the payment was a direct debit that had been cancelled? Can I still claim payment shouldn't have been made?

Hi guys, I had loans with Pay Day Express & Month End Money. I knew I was going to be unable to afford the scheduled payment and would need to default, so I cancelled the direct debit set up by Pay Day Express and cancelled my debit card. I left my current account balance at precisely £0.00, and started using a basic account from another bank for my day-to-day banking. Imagine my suprise when, 2 weeks later, I logged in to my current account to find I had a balance of -£530!! It appears that, on the same day, Pay Day Express took two payments, the first for £15 followed by a payment of £90. Then Month End Money took £425!! I immediately emailed my bank to query these payments, and explained that if there was no d/d set up, and I had cancelled the debit card then I disputed that these payments should have been made without my authority. The bank have emailed me back and asked me to phone them, and I also got a letter demanding immediate payment of my unauthorised overdraft. I agree it is unauthorised because I didn't give my permission for them to pay these people from my account! So I think I need to write to my bank. Has anyone any advice? Can my bank just decide to pay these PDLs event hough I've withdrawn my authority for payment?

Oh I well remember the ridiculous amount of money I had to pay up front just to even be considered as a tenant! From what I know, Maras will perform a search with a CRA & take up references for you, and advise the landlord/aganecy from there as to your suitability as a tenant. I would still advise finding out which CRA Maras search at, and checking your file for this CRA - it's worth knowing even without the Maras check looming, if there's any risk of your little o/d trouble appearing on there. Be prepared and all that! Good luck with Maras/Lettings Agency - hope you settle in to your new home soon!

You're lucky you managed to catch this bunch on the phone. I've been trying all day without success. Have emailed them twice without the courtesy of a response. Have fired off a strongly-worded letter to them today. My beef is who they allow to credit search me (DCAs etc) without my permission & without ascertaining that there is a legitimate reason to do so. But it's back to the old problem in that CRAs are largely unregulated & have no code of conduct. It's amazing, isn't it, they charge us for access to our records, then charge companies for access to our records, and then sell the data on to further line their pockets! Oh, they deny this, of-course, but it's strange how today I had a letter from AktivKapital requesting that I contact them. Not heard from them in years until I took out a paid subscription to Experian & Equifax. Coincidence? I think not!

I was credit checked by a lettings agency about 18m ago. At the time, they explained that they were seeking to ascertain I had no adverse info, eg CCJs & defaults, rather than to credit score me or assess my credit worthiness. Do you know which CRA the lettings agency will use? They should tell you this if you ask them. Have you checked your CRA file? I would suggest doing so - it will show if your o/d info has been recorded. BTW not all banks report to all CRAs, and some report varying amounts of detail, so you may be lucky!

Subscribing to this if you don't mind - I've got the exact same problem with Equifax. i'm just putting together my first letter to them to request the removal of the multiple searches from DCAs (yet no debt on my file) but I fully expect to receive a an uncooperative response. There seem to be a few Caggers with similar issues.

Result Lapchien66! I will use you as inspiration and make a similar complaint! Hopefully i, too, will be reporting back with good news....

Useful info, simonjohn, and I for one will consider this process - I hope others do too. Could anyone point me in the direction of discovering the process of a CRA file being searched? I mean, do the CRAs allow searches from any company claiming the right to do so? Is there no requirement for the subject of the data to give their consent? Who's responsibility is it for the accuracy of the information held - the CRA or the searching/reporting company? I understand that whenever I've applied for credit there's always been a section that I have to give my consent to mentioning consult the files of a CRA, ongoing searches, report conduct of account etc. etc. That's fine, I guess, while my account's still live, but these leeches are searching for an account that is no longer enforceable, and that is something I have never agreed to.

Not that I would ever defend the CRAs and their practices, but I too noticed Camelot on my Experian report, and it's listed as identity check or something similar. I am assured by Experian that this is not a credit check, and does not appear to other lenders, and therefore does not affect my credit file in any way. On this point, at least, I believe them. Makes sense really - after all, you're not applying for credit from Camelot, are you? So that's one less search to worry about on my file, now to tackle the 20-odd from the DCAs that keep appearing on there ...

I have the charmers at AktivKapital and Capquest searching my files. It's so wrong that this goes on without our consent.

It would appear we have similar problems: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/205604-dcas-wantonly-searching-my.html My searches appear under Table 1, searches relating to credit application, therefore my fear is that they will affect my credit rating. I also heard that credit searches stay on file for 1 year, and debt tracing stays on file for 2 years. Either way, I think it's appalling that these DCAs are allowed to dip into our files at will! We should always be asked to consent to such searches, surely? And the CRAs should require proof of the debt before they allow access. I'd really loveto know there is anything to be done about this. I'd like to have the searches removed, obviously, but I'd like to know this can be stopped from happening again, to me or to anyone else. Seems to me that we have far too little power over who controls and accesses our data.

Cheers for the reply. I have searched Trust Online - no CCJs against me! So, if DCAs are allowed to search occasionally, surely they should have to be accurate with the name they search for? Or can they look for anyone with a similar name? And, why are they listed in searches relating to credit applications? I am not applying for credit from them. I would be interested to know how/why DCAs are allowed access to people's credit files. Surely they should have to prove an interest first? Do we not have the right to limit who looks at our information?

Hi there, In an effort to improve my credit rating, I have recently subscribed to the 3 CRAs online. (Annoyed that I have to pay to access MY info, but heyho...) None of my files have any defaults, late payments, CCJs etc. - in fact, aside from Virgin Media and my bank, all credit accounts on there are recently opened & reporting nice little green o's. I have previously been in debt. I got in a mess while at Uni about 10 years ago, which resulted in RBS closing my account. I never paid back what I owed on my o/d or c card, but then again they never asked me to - I had absolutely no further communication from them. I also had a catalogue account and 2 store cards that were left unpaid. I took the ostrich approach & never replied to any DCA letters. I moved from my parents address, where all the debt would be registered to, in 2006, but any debt from there must be well over 7 years old. I do not know if any of it resulted in CCJs, as all correspondence to me was returned to sender unanswered, and certainly no bailiffs/thugs or similar ever turned up. But all this info has now dropped off my CRA fles, and I am starting to get credit again (recently got full current account, credit card, and catalogue account to help with credit rating). However, I was alarmed to read the information Equifax hold on me: Previous Addresses (This is my parent's address & I haven't lived there since 2006) 7, ANYROAD, ANY VILLAGE, PRESTON, LANCS, PR0 000 Table 1: Credit Searches The following table shows searches undertaken in connection with credit applications: Name Date Search Reason Company Search Type Jane Smith 08/08/2008 Outstanding Debt Aktiv Kapital Group Uk Jane Smith 02/01/2009 Outstanding Debt Aktiv Kapital Group Uk Jane Smith 13/10/2008 Outstanding Debt Aktiv Kapital Group Uk Jane Smith 17/11/2008 Outstanding Debt Aktiv Kapital Group Uk Jane Smith 18/11/2008 Outstanding Debt Aktiv Kapital Group Uk J Smith 16/11/2007 Outstanding Debt Capquest Uk Ltd Linked Addresses FLAT 0 3, SOME ROAD, NICE TOWN, LANCS, FY8 888 (I lived here in 1997/1998 and did not give Equifax this address - in fact I'd actually forgotten all about the place. I have no live accounts from this period so i'm annoyed they have this address) Table 1: Credit Searches The following table shows searches undertaken in connection with credit applications: Name Date Search ReasonCompanySearch Type Jane Smith 08/08/2008 Outstanding Debt Aktiv Kapital Group Uk Jane Smith 17/11/2008 Outstanding Debt Aktiv Kapital Group Uk Jane Smith 18/11/2008 Outstanding Debt Aktiv Kapital Group Uk J Smith 16/11/2007 Outstanding Debt Capquest Uk Ltd Table 2: Other Searches The following table shows searches undertaken for purposes other than credit applications. These searches have no impact on a credit decision: NameDateSearch ReasonCompany No Other Searches Present So, table 1 says the searches are undertaken in connection with credit applications. But the actual searches are by DCAs. The DCAs have not contacted me here or at my parents address re any debt. I understand any debt may be statute barred, but I'm worried if I got a CCJ then it is still enforceable? If I contact the DCAs I would have to give them my present address to reply to, and then the debt could end up back in court. In any case, do DCAs just have access to my CRA files to search at will?? I've never given permission for my data to be processed like this! I understand that searches relating to debt stay on Equifax for 2 years - but shouldn't Equifax require proof of enforceability before granting them access to my info? Also, how do Equifax know J Smith is me? Are the DCA leeches just allowed to try various name combinations until they hit the jackpot? Apologies for lengthy post. It's my first time & I've probably broken loads of etiquette rules. Also apologies to any Jane Smiths if I've taken your name in vain ;-) i've tried looking around for answers to this q, but I'm really sorry if it's been asked before & I'm just being dumb. Just been through trustonline.org.uk & confirmed there are no CCJs registered against me at any address. Which is nice. Cost £8 a search though!