Hi, Thanks for advice, I am just waiting on SAR provision, I called yesterday (after having spoken to the SAR department last week) and the bundle should be delivered tomorrow. It'll be quite interesting to see what's in there. The SAR team, upon receipt of SAR chase up letter, claim not to have recived the original SAR and payment, so it will be interesting to see how this will evolve. Luckily I took a photo of postal order attached to the front of the SAR request, something I always do since my G/F had issues with misappropriation of CCA payment by a DCA a while back. I'll keep the thread updated incase others have the same issues. Thanks CS

Hi, Well it gets better! I still have access too 'payplan account', so had a look, There's are message saying the plan will be cancelled within the next 10 days, quite shocking as they responded to my 'cancel' letter at least 4 months ago. More shocking is that after I cancelled the DMP, not only have they split the £10 SAR between creditors, some of which had a zero balance but they have also resent increased offers to one creditor, 2 accounts which (A) how can payplan even contact creditor to increase offer when account is cancelled (B) the creditor having already confirmed 'payplan' is removed from my account, appears to have accepted correspondance with payplan (without any communication to me) and has now sent arrears notices etc! This is turning into more of a mess, now my CRA will be trashed with late markers, after nearly 8 years of DMP. The account concerned will not drop of CRA for a while yet (problems getting them defaulted at start of DMP). I appreciate this is a ICO issue, but as originally asked does anyone know if this is a FOS issue too? I am out of pocket already for the initial mistake by payplan, leading me to cancel the DMP I the first instance, but they have since not implemented cancelation letter, split £10 SAR between creditors and then approached creditor with new payment plan when they really shouldn't have. There are issues here with both the creditors actions and payplan! COBS - unfairness and DPA failures by creditor, but do these rules apply to payplan? Anyone know? Ps thanks for the previous advice guys. I will be complaining to ICO re Data protection issues but I am so I really want to take it further. CS

Hi, This is a strange one, I'm posting here to see if a common problem. About 6 months ago Pay Plan messed up my DMP by increasing payments to my creditors without contacting me. One creditors balance was cleared and PayPlan created a new payment plan without contacting me. It turned into a gigantic mess so I sent a formal letter to Pay plan to cancel the DMP and started to self administer my DMP, as well as complaining about their mess up. Got an email response, very poor response, and decided to get new SAR details to confirm the facts before making a formal complaint to them. DSAR sent, no response. Searched through my files. When I sar'd them in 2012, same thing, I only got a response when I send LBA. Last week I sent a SAR chase up letter, they claim not to have received the original letter, but will oblige with the SAR this coming week. I just though their DSAR department was incompetant, but then I got the shock of my life. I opened a CC statement to find a pay link payment on there, why? My PayPlan DMP is closed. Looked into my account, they have split the £10 fee for the SAR amongst my creditors! The SAR was a formal letter, clearly detailing I wanted full disclosure etc, especially telephone notes (as they were also very naughty last year and lied to me!). The best bit.......the have paid several creditors whose balance was 0! Sheer incompetence. Are play Plan covered by FOS? Am I entitled to any compensation, as I now have to spend time contacting quite a few creditors (again) to sort this mess out. Last time I had to renegotiate with 9 creditors to set up DMP myself, with many of them several signed for letters, requiring new i&e's etc, so the costs have been mounting up. Not what I need in the slightest. Any advice would be welcome CS

Hi citizen b, Thanks, I suppose I knew the answer really, I'm a bit fed up with the number of formal complaints that has been necessary to Lloyd's. I feel I have been continuously complaining to them for over two years and they still continue to be incompetent. It is so frustrating, time to hand over to ico. Let them deal with the stress. Thanks CS

Hi All, I'm back with problems relating to Lloyd's, CRA's and data protection. Both for some advice and to see if this is a common problem with lloyds and their inability to update records correctly under the Data Protection Act. History Credit card was incorrectly defaulted as 2012, after a battle Lloyd's , in august 2013, finally corrected the default to be 2006 which means no longer reported on CRA files. 2 months later, it reappears. New formal complaint, apologies, some compensation and reassurance this won't happen again. Just checked equifax. It's back, with a default date of 2012! Loan : was incorrectly default to be 2010, again after a battle (still ongoing) it has been updated to January 2008, with confirmation in Nov 2013 that 'this should disappear from CRA in January 2014, if it doesn't get back to us' ...or similar. This is now on CRA as default of 2010, records updated by Lloyd's in late January this year. So even if it was a case of it should disappear a month later, in feb, it won't as the actual default date is still wrong. Advice on actions to take? As I've already complained to Lloyd's re CC reappearing, and in reference to the comments in the loan letter, Lloyd's clearly have an issue with accounts which defaulted over 6 years ago and their reporting of them, whe they should not be applied to the CRA. I have endured too much protracted communications with Lloyd's, I am still in a chain in a complaint about the loan, that i just want to put a stop to the repeated updating of the credit file inaccurately. Any advice on what actions to take? Should I give them one more chance, or should I escalate to ico? I don't have a great history with their Andover department as I was almost starting court action before they finally gave me full disclosure. Thanks CS

Hello, I've had similar problems with Lloyd's, and I'm in the process of getting the accounts correctly defaulted along with refunds for the interest incorrectly charged to the account. A couple of questions: Is this a CC or Loan? Do you have copies of default notices? Do you have copies of formal demands (either from SCM or internal LTSB departments)? If you have a copy of these I may be able to give you some advice/ let you know what I did. CS

Hi, Thanks for the reply. I really didn't know they could go 10 years back! WOW I've only ever noticed the records go back for 6 years, but I've just printed a recent copy of my CRA and thats how I noticed 8 years on there. Is it a fairly new reporting method? In the past they used to only record 6 years, either with or without a default etc? Thanks CS

Hi, I am in the process of trying to tidy my CRA files. having been on a DMP for 7ish years through PayPlan. I have attained most of my information from my creditors through SAR and CCA requests and I have found the majority do not update the CRA files with a true reflection of payments made etc. (I know I shouldn't really be surprised ) I am in the process of reviewing one of my creditors, for whom I did not make any payments from Feb 06 for 5 months, then I started a DMP. This is a great example in that Default Notice and Formal Demands were made after 3 years of being on a 'temporary' DMP (at the start the DMP manager showed a budget to last in excess of 7 years!) and they defaulted me in 2009 as I only just then entered into a 'long term' repayment plan. (Not sure whose fault that was, Pay Plan or OC). At the time I didn't challenge the entry of the default, I was bit 'head in the sand' whilst just making the repayments every month as I wrongly assumed that Pay Plan was sorting it all out for me! I didn't think for one minute the OC would default the account after 3 years, and for no reason. I hadn't missed any recent payments before the decision for them to default. I had a couple of blips on 2007 and 2008, where I missed a couple of repayments (thats another great story - I was was bullied by a well know loan provider into making additional payments in excess of DMP so failed the DMP for a couple of months as I didn't know any better at the time!). I attach a PDF of my CRA for this file, I think the first '6' should be in July 2006, and an AP thereafter, however I am contacting them under the DPA etc as I believe it should have defaulted in 2006 - when all of the payments were missed. So that's the background, but my question is : Shouldn't the CRA file only show the past 6 years? I.e. should it only go back as far as Aug 2007? I'm trying to tidy up my files, but if the records are now showing OVER 6 years then I'm not really going to be making any progress (I have a few others who have also messed up the date of default and I'm trying to clear them all). Also any advice on what angle I could use to get them to update the Default to 2006 would be really appreciated. Currently Im thinking of the approach of : no payments made for 6 months, no DMP approved until FEB 2008, at Marker '6' it is clearly seen that the account is severely in arrears and defaulted, sent to 'collection' etc. Oh, and the fact that their internal notes 'charged off' the account in late 2006 - this I think is the key point to the Default being recognised as 2006. CS [ATTACH]45778[/ATTACH]

Hi, I'm not an expert at all, but I am quite familiar with the Data Protection Act, having used it more times than I have wanted to! I have just received a 'final' SAR bundle from BC for my EGG account. It has taken nearly a year, after almost starting legal action. I have an IT background, so I am familiar with reading computer reports, and what kind of information should be recorded on computer systems etc. I hope I can help a little, I see you have already received good advice on here and I hope that I can be of assistance in helping you understand the BC SAR. I have a few questions, which if you could answer I could help you read the report to see if they have defaulted your account. (Mine has already been defaulted so it is more simple for me). Also I do not understand the Scottish legal system which may have an impact on the documents they need, to get a CCJ. I have read the thread quickly, I think you have stated that the account has not been defaulted. Is this true? Can BC or Marlin take legal action if the account has not been defaulted? Below I will explain what I have found in the reports received. Have you a copy of BQT001 and BQT002 and DMSAR001? This is my interpretation and findings on the reports, I have viewed a few of these reports, for both BC and EGG for myself and a friend and my suggestions here appear to be true in our cases, so please double check these suggestions with your data and letters etc. We have both been defaulted which makes our history a little more clear cut. I have not found any detail on any report which details the account default date. BC must have this information somewhere but so far they have declined to provide this. However in our situations, the actual default date is before the actual date quoted on the report next to 'DATE RECOVERY STATUS' field, which is also in the 'ITEM REF' column referenced as CECIP029, on report titled 'CARDHOLDER / ACCOUNT DETAILS' BQT001. The date of the accounts 'closure' is also not populated in this report, nor anywhere else in any document provided in the SAR bundle. I tried to copy from your previous post but my formatting has gone a little wrong...... and I cant manage to fix it. I assumed that they would have sent me the original credit agreement, I got this eventually after 10 months. A photocopy of the actual signed credit agreement. all statements detailing transactions, again these only came on the 3rd bundle. They go as far back as March 2002 payments, up to Nov 11, as above. After Nov 11 - again all 000000's. But payments made via DMP were noted on 2nd computer report, BQT002 in 'memo detail' lines CESME017. These payments were not reported anywhere against a running total, nor do I have proof of the outstanding balance. default notices, These details are also in BQT002, again in the memo lines - if these happened after Nov 11. So if the account was default by BC this would be noted in this report. If defaulted by EGG then it would not be noted here. transfer to DCA's etc etc etc. Well here is what I got.....:- 4. Barclaycard Copy Apps - this is a few pages of info like my address, my employer, my salary, my bank details etc that I must have given Egg when I originally applied for the card in 2002 but this is NOT a credit agreement. Just a print off of some info I have given them. 5.Barclaycard Migrated Memos :- A sheet that says "Memo List and Detail" and then gives my name and a credit card number, again - not my number. Then a single line that says "05/11/11 4 CUSTOMER SIGNED UP FOR SMS OR EMAIL ALERTS" and that's it. This should really be more pages. There are pages titled MSH4 (top left hand corner). This notes are direct from the EGG computer system, ie all notes prior to Nov 11. The other reports BQT001, BQT002 and DMSAR001 are BC reports. BQT002 - should show all actions taken by Barclaycard when contacting you or you contacting them. In my notes I have references to my CCA request. What matters here is when BC owned the account and when MARLIN purchased the account. If your CCA request went back to BC (via Marlin) then the request should be noted here in these memo lines. There are even notes in here which state the date SAR request received and actioned etc. I think that if you have only one line to this report then BC have purposely withheld information from you. This happened to my friend, who has both EGG and original BC with BC. For the original account which was formally disputed with many letters, the 'printing' dates for this report was only up to 2009! ie. they did not print out the report upto the date of the SAR request, thus omitting the most crucial information which was required. 6. Finally, and this is where it gets interesting. A bunch of "Copy Statements" from 2nd December 2011 to 2nd May 2013. These statements are 0 as the account has been charged off. Personally I think the BC computer systems are unable to process the EGG accounts properly which is why BC as part of a SAR request just sent 0 balance statements since Nov 11 when they purchased a large portfolio of EGG credit card accounts. What is wrong is that there are no documents produced which shows a running balance and payments received as part of a SAR request. I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned PPI? Is this relevant? Also in my notes, as the account has been defaulted by EGG before being sold to BC there are issues with the enforcement of the debt as BC are currently unable to get hold of the documentation required to enforce. This is clearly stated in my notes. It appears these notes are missing from your SAR details. This is the remainder of report BQT002 which I think you have not been given. It depends really when BC sold the account as to what information will be held here, but if they didn't sell until after your CCA requests, or still own the account then all of this report should be provided. I hope this helps, any questions please ask. I'll be back on tomorrow. CS

Hi, I'm in a similar situation, and have been trying to attain my SAR details for my defaulted EGG, now barclaycard for over a year. Did you recieve the SAR information from Canada Square or was it Barclaycard? I ask because I have written numerous letters to both Canada Square and Barclaycard over the past year and have been fobbed off so much that I am liaising with Barclaycard 'litigation' department before I start court action for my documents. What may be of some interest to you, have you recieved the printed 'memo' reports from barclaycard? These are quite relevent if you have already made a CCA request. CS

hi, Thanks Brig for the info. I need to update my thread properly with my situation, which I will do over the next few days. My agreement, is the original agreement, which was posted to me after an Internet application in 2004(ish). I thought that for some strange reason I hadn't returned the signed agreement to BC, as it only has my signature. I have just recieved some documents from a SAR request and inside was an exact copy of the above agreement. Again with no bank signature, no 'recieved on' or other bank stamps etc. The only stamp on it was a barcode which was the card number. This stamp is not on my original copy. This is confusing me, as my other agreements vary from app forms, with bank signatures (duo purpose) to agreements with both signatures, and others with the bank stamp which is what I think is the approved stamp to which you reference above. My copy of this agreement has no markings apart from my signature, and the copy from BC only has a barcode for the account number. I have been busy reading my BC SAR reports, but I do intend to document my CCA findings in my own thread soon, with PDFs. It is all rather confusing and unusual in comparison to the other CCAs I have recieved, which is why I have included this on the OP's thread, as it might be a 'practice' followed the the OC at the time? CS

Hi, I have been wondering this too. Its not BC is it? Do you have a copy of the original signed agreement with only your signature? CS

Thanks slick. I think I am a bit too 'caught up in the process', maybe it might be time for me to stand back a little and take a dept breath. I've sent various Formal Complaints to Data Controller at BC Head Office, which have been ignored. Also to CitiGroup Data Controller as Barclaycard refused to answer any letters sent. Also ignored, even though I asked them to respond directly! All were recorded/signed for, all all have indeed been signed for. I sent my LBA's to the CEO's of both companies at the registered Head Offices. I think my frustration at Barclaycards refusal to provide the information, and just ignore every formal complaint was taking over! I have prepared a response, including a specific breakdown of all missing info which I need, which I know they must have. I have copied in all previous correspondence to both companies, and I will sent a copy of this to their litigation team and their data controller (special deliivery). It's then up to them if they decide to finally provide the information, if they don't then it's small claims here we come. I attempted to complain to the FOS about another CC I have, whereby the CC company blatently declined to provide all information. FOS said out of their remit, but come back if ICO prove CC have not provided all information. Its far too lengthy to wait for FOS/ICO to sort it out. I've only followed up properly on 2 companies so far, I have about 6/7 others still refusing to provide full disclosure. I think by the end I will be too familiar with small claims! Then there's the charges and PPI reclaims......a very long haul. Thanks CS

Hi, Thanks Slick. I have decided that I am definitely going ahead with Small Claims for DPA, and I am so fed up with BC that I intend to go for all charges too - if only they will suplly them to me for the EGG card!!! Just one quick question to anyone familiar with the LBA process- I have received a response from Barclays Litigation Department saying that they will investigate my LBA get back to me, however I have realised that my LBA's (for DPA) only include this EGG card and not the original BC. i.e. only one account and not both (the second account was only referenced in a Formal Complaint and not LBA). I intend to reply to this contact, and send copies of all Formal Complaints and LBA's to the legal team, giving them a short window of opportunity to contact relevant departments and one last chance to provide the missing information (at least I have received a response and a contact name after nearly a year of letters!). I intend to title this letter as an LBA, to ensure I include both account numbers. Should I copy this letter to Data Controller at HO to ensure they cant say I haven't sent them an LBA (for the second account) if they fail to respond to this final chance? Or is responding to a letter from the 'litigation' team enough for LBA protocols? The litigation department is also at One CHurchill Place, on level 29 - so it is really the registered address. My concern is that they will have the claim thrown out of court as I only reference once account number instead of two in all my LBA's. Any ideas? thanks CS

Hi, I have recieved another small selection of DPA information.....for the 'EGG' card BC have provided : A computer printout which details some personal info, dates opened (I.e date of transfer in NOV 11, and not 2002) and basically states there is a zero balance and no payments are expected? Which begs me to ask why I am paying them through PayPlan?!?! However I know there is a balance outstanding which is why the DMP is set up. BC have provided statements from Nov 11 to present day with just 0000's in every numerical location, ie statements with all values 0. And no statements prior to acquiring the EGG account in Nov 11. I am at the point now where I have recieved acknowledgment from BC legal team, after many Formal Complaint and LBA to both EGG and BC. The legal team are looking into my LBA, but this still continues to delay matters. As I have a contact in the legal team, I am preparing one final letter to give them 14 days before I start a claim. Please Can anybody help with the following questions...... Do I submit a joint claim (under failure to comply under DPA 1998) for both BC and EGG accounts, or have 2 claims? Has anybody managed to get EGG statements and/or PPI information prior to BC purchase of EGG accounts, ie 2002-2011. I think I have read one person has managed to get these statements after a bit of a fight, unfortunately my fight will now have to be taken to the next round! Thanks CS