Citi Cards being obstructive with SAR

[DonkeyB]

I only accept hay.

[The Debt Star]

That'd be "the last straw" lol

[DonkeyB]

Get your coat.

[The Debt Star]

or cloak?

[DonkeyB]

Taxi’s outside. Maybe that’s a starship.

[The Debt Star]

pmsl

[Master Chief]

Oi, quit your horseplay and stop ass'ing about on my thread! lol

[Master Chief]

Or for the benefit of Darth 'Debt Star' Thread In-Vader.

 

Hmmmmm, horseplay you must not with DonkeyB, or be an Ass in-Vader!

Edited November 12, 2010 by Master Chief

[DonkeyB]

That is gross! Never touched her, your honour!

[Master Chief]

Protest too much does DonkeyB. Hmmmmmm, Yoda laugh bo**ocks off!

[The Debt Star]

Donkey always gives "stable" advice young padawan. Either you want her advice "ee-aw" you don't :)

[Master Chief]

Donkey always gives "stable" advice young padawan. Either you want her advice "ee-aw" you don't :)

 

[Master Chief]

Hi All,

 

As the title suggests, I received my SAR back from the DCA (interstingly before the CCA request deadline, which was sent at the same time).

 

I'm very dissapointed with what I got back, no executed agreement, or other docs I had specified.

 

But, there is strong evidence to suggest that some of the information has been manipulated to suit!

 

Would one of you (or some of you) knowledgeable Caggers care to take a look and let me know what you think, please?

 

I attach two zip files, which contain PDF's of what I received back from the DCA (one is explanatory notes). As I'm not to keen on posting up for ALL to see, the zip files require a password to open. PM me for the password.

 

Or just reply with 'password please' or 'gimme the chuffin password' and I'll PM it to you.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

MC

 

[ATTACH]23187[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]23186[/ATTACH]

Edited November 14, 2010 by Master Chief

[silverfox1961]

Before you allow anyone to see the files, have you made sure ALL your identifiable info has been obscured?

 

If this post is related to a thread you already have with the un-named DCA, it may be better to have this post within that thread

[Master Chief]

Yes, I have removed all info.

 

And yes it i related to previous thread, but thought a new post would be better. If you disagree, perhaps a kind mod could move it to the correct thread.

 

ty,

 

MC

 

EDIT:

 

*Posts Now Merged With Relevant Thread*

Edited November 15, 2010 by Master Chief

[saintly_1]

Threads merged as requested

[Master Chief]

Threads merged as requested

 

Thank you saintly.

[coledog]

Interesting to see what the Citi SAR throws up, I think that you need both. A DCA will not necesarily have a credit agreement or default notice as it is the most annoying thing that they are chasing debts without the necessary paperwork or knowing if this exists.

 

I assume that the letter of introduction is being classed as the Notice of Assignment - you could do with posting that up.

 

You need Citi to confirm exactly when this was sold.

[Master Chief]

Interesting to see what the Citi SAR throws up, I think that you need both. A DCA will not necesarily have a credit agreement or default notice as it is the most annoying thing that they are chasing debts without the necessary paperwork or knowing if this exists.

 

I assume that the letter of introduction is being classed as the Notice of Assignment - you could do with posting that up.

 

You need Citi to confirm exactly when this was sold.

 

Thanks CD, yes I agree. The point of sending both a CCA & SAR to DCA was that if the original signed executed agreement was not forthcoming with the CCA, the SAR should root it out, if it exists.

 

SAR is with OC and awaiting its return with bated breath.

 

What about the lack of telephone related information, is what they say correct?

 

The DCA's letter of introduction was dated 23/5/03, followed by CIti NoA 05/06/03. However, DCA had clearly been processing my data with CRA's some 8/9 months earlier. If you look at the log excerpts, it begins 05/06/2003, which is clearly incorrect. It makes no reference to letter of introductioon (DCA NoA). There were telephone calls and letters preceeding 05/06/2003, although these are mentioned, they are logged on incorrect dates and not in the order that they happened. Which I can prove!

 

If you look at the timing of the initial eight entries, they all are the at same time (different dates), when you consider the inacuracies with these entries it looks like these were created/editied to match their version of events!

 

So in effect, not only have they unlawfully processed my data, but it would appear that they have tried to cover it up!

 

Not so happy to post up correspondence so that it is 'freely available'. I could probably do with some advice as to whether doing so could have a negative consequences. If it doesn't matter, then I'd be happy to post up everything fully, minus personal info of course!

 

Advice please.

 

MC

Edited November 15, 2010 by Master Chief
typos

[coledog]

The telephone info is an interesting one and I would certainly have a word with ICO about that to confirm if that is their view of things.

 

There is plenty of 'personal information' (anonymous of course) posted on here and it does enable people to offer advice to you and is informative to others.

[Master Chief]

The telephone info is an interesting one and I would certainly have a word with ICO about that to confirm if that is their view of things.

 

There is plenty of 'personal information' (anonymous of course) posted on here and it does enable people to offer advice to you and is informative to others.

 

I absolutely agree. I could really do with some clarity on this as I'm getting a bit bogged down and finding it difficult to see the wood for the trees.

 

However, depending on what the ICO says, I may well consider a court action against DCA and I'm not sure whether posting information freely would in some way jeopardise that. Bit of a quandary really, so could do with some guidance on this from those that know or have experience of.

 

I am blatantly aware that my 'cloak and dagger' approach is limiting the responses that I'm getting and I could well be missing other opportunities in doing so.

 

I'll take advice on this, if I could ask for a few comments from people please?

 

 

MC

[coledog]

All depends where you are going with this but there are lots of people with similar problems and worse.

[harrassed senior]

I have a current complaint with a CRA because of similar problems as yours and am awaiting the responses from their 'clients' (buddies)! and ICO.

[Master Chief]

I have a current complaint with a CRA because of similar problems as yours and am awaiting the responses from their 'clients' (buddies)! and ICO.

 

Thanks HS. Have you felt comfortable with posting docs in connection with your complaint?

 

MC

[Master Chief]

Just spent more than 12 hours solid preparing and sanitising the attached docs. The file names should be fairly explanatory.

 

Although I have tried to remove identifiable information and re-format (without changing meaning etc.), I think the originator(s) would clearly recognise their own work. If that's the case then so be it!

 

There is a lot there to look through, so my apologies in advance.

 

I have commented within the docs, where appropriate, if I could get some comments please

 

[ATTACH]23215[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]23214[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]23211[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]23213[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]23212[/ATTACH]