Ico

[JonCris]

Looks Fine to me..........in para 11 & 12 your spell from as form. I do it all the time.

Also as your letter is quite long may I suggest that you number the paras then should anyone want to discuss it with you it will make it so much easier

[noobrider]

Also in the 3rd from last paragraph you refer to a compliant instead of a complaint. Small details but make it look more professional.

[Glenn UK]

Cheers guys

 

ill make the changes,

 

Glenn

[Glenn UK]

Well the second letter was amended and sent off to the man at the ICO dealing with the Abbey, tomorrow ill fax them from the offcie and try to ring him too.

 

GLenn

[dave]

Being picky, but no capital "F" on faithfully....and if you are addressing a known person by name it should be 'sincerely'.

[Glenn UK]

Just an update in case you thought id sent the letters and forgotten them.

 

I have now spoken to the ICO three times conversations totalling around 1 1/2 hours, its amazing how long you can talk to an answering machine!!

 

Seriousely I have managed to speak with a guy in the abbey investigation section about the letters at some length.

 

I know they have received them but they are so snowed under that im not sure as of yet he has actually seen them directly.

 

I have arranged to ring him tomorrow and will check that he actually has them availlable directly.

 

We tried if nothing else.

 

Glenn

[Glenn UK]

Well I know the Abbey investigation team were visitng Abbey today and the good news is they had our letters in front of them as of yesterday AM.

 

I dont know if it will ultimately influence the decision by the OFT, lets just say we at least tried to influence the outcome in as fair and just way as we could.

 

Thanks to all who contributed and keeping my fingers crossed for the right result.

 

Glenn

[pugsley]

well done Glenn

[Glenn UK]

I did volunteer to go and carry some bags or papers for them.

 

I was keen to see the abbey faces when the Information Commissioners Office started asking about RECALL and their index system which was computer based in the late 1980s.

 

Still I wonder when we will hear, they expect to write to all complainants on or shortly after the 11th sept apparently.

 

Be nice to get a nod and wink earlier but im not banking on it.

 

Glenn

[give_me_it_back]

Good to find this thread. Very keen to hear what is reported back...

[pugsley]

bump

[reclamationproclamation]

Any news on this today? Not sure where to look...

[Glenn UK]

I spoke with the ICO, the 'Abbey' dept and they do not have an announcement as yet.

 

I would be rubbish as a reporter/interrogator because i coudnt get my contact to tell me anyhting about the process, but hey he's a nice bloke and has some interesting views so its not a waste of time.

 

Glenn

[give_me_it_back]

Great. Thanks Glenn - looking forward to the latest..

[pugsley]

They sure are dragging their feet

[reclamationproclamation]

They obviusly don't see this as a straight forward decision...

[Glenn UK]

I agree, I spoke to my contact today and sent him some more info re Abbeys perception of their fiche system.

 

So i think the case is building against Abbey.

 

My reading of this is that the Information Commissioners Office doesn't see itself as the defender of the people, and I think that the financial muscle of the Abbey is harder to resist than the will of a few angry customers.

 

So the delay in my view seems to be suggesting what they thought would be a done deal in Abbeys favour, is not quite so clear cut.

 

I could of course be completely wrong, but i cannot see any reason why they would struggle with the answer if it was as clear cut as Abbey thought.

 

Incidentally I have started to gather evidence on Barclaycard too, so I am trying to find out who to deal with on that front.

 

Glenn

[give_me_it_back]

Good work Glenn.

 

I suppose the IC will also write to everyone who reported Abbey (they said the would write to me with their findings), and I haven't heard yet.

 

No news is good news..?...

[reclamationproclamation]

I agree, I spoke to my contact today and sent him some more info re Abbeys perception of their fiche system.

 

So i think the case is building against Abbey.

 

My reading of this is that the Information Commissioners Office doesn't see itself as the defender of the people, and I think that the financial muscle of the Abbey is harder to resist than the will of a few angry customers.

 

So the delay in my view seems to be suggesting what they thought would be a done deal in Abbeys favour, is not quite so clear cut.

 

I could of course be completely wrong, but i cannot see any reason why they would struggle with the answer if it was as clear cut as Abbey thought.

 

Incidentally I have started to gather evidence on Barclaycard too, so I am trying to find out who to deal with on that front.

 

Glenn

 

Wow they are REALLY taking their time, has your contact given any indication as to what is taking them so long?

[skyap]

JonChris - I realise some of your posts in this thread are quite old now but you said you got your older statements (from microfiche) off of Abbey. How did you manage this? I presume you didn't pay for them.

 

I'm having the same issue with Barclaycard but it would cost me over £100 to get the statements I need. I just want to try and get them one last time before I estimate the charges prior to 2004.

 

Cheers.

[meagain]

I'm having the same issue with Barclaycard but it would cost me over £100 to get the statements I need. I just want to try and get them one last time before I estimate the charges prior to 2004.

 

Tell them the DPA states a maximum fee of £10, and you reserve the right to amend your request at any time. That way, if there's something you didn't realise you needed, they can't charge you for a second request.

[LoveBird4u]

I received a letter today from abbey telling me if i want the microfisch to send £10 per account.

Birdy

[Glenn UK]

Snap!!!

 

I have two of those letters!!!

 

Glenn

[LoveBird4u]

Hmmmmm how many complaint letters and leaflets have you got bet I have more than you:rolleyes:

Birdy

[JonCris]

Tell them both that by demanding more that the statutory fee they are in breach of the DPA. One good thing though they cant now deny they have access or that they have disposed of them & no longer hold them can they!