Ive won *£6494.93* Ive won (LIP v Abbey)

[lostinparadise]

They have only served it. It hasnt been to court yet. They have until the 6th July to respond!!

 

LIP

[lostinparadise]

Hi All

Tomorrow is the deadline for the DPA Non compliance order that was served on Abbey, it also happens to be the date for when my last LBA to shABBEY runs out!!!

Ive not heard a word out of shABBEY with regards to the court action and i havent received any further statements.

I guess ill have to put in an estimated claim in on Friday. If and when i get the statements through then ill have to claim for the outstanding amount if there is any i guess.

Im just going with the flow.....they can stall....but i can wait as long as it takes!!!

[lostinparadise]

Hi

Well when i got home from work, i found the defence letter from shABBEY's solicitors "DLA PIPER RUDNICK GRAY CARY UK LLP".

This is what it says:

 

1. Unless otherwise indicated references to paragraph numbers are references to the numbered paragraphs in the particulars of Claim issued on 13 June 2006.

2. Paragraphs 1 and 2 are admitted.

3. As to Paragraph 3, it is admitted that the claimant sent a Subject Access Request ("SAR") dated 7th April 2006. The defendant paid the sum of £10 in accordance with section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (the"Act").

4. Paragraph 4 is denied. The defendant denies that it has failed to comply with the SAR. It has provided all the data which the claimant is entitled to receive pursuant to the Act.

5. Under section 7 of the Act the claimant is only entitled to receive "personal data". Pursuant to section 1 of the Act "personal data" is defined (in so far as relevant) as:

"data which relate to a living individual who can be identified

(a) from those data, or

(b) from those data and other information which is in the possessionof or is likely to come into the possession of the data controller..."

6. Pursuant to section 1 of the Act "data" is defined as follows:

"information which

(a) is being processed by means of equipment operating automatically in response to instructions given for that purpose;

(b) is recorded with the intention that it should be processed by means of such equipment;

© is recorded as part of a relevant filing system or with the intention that it should form part of a relevant filing system; or

(d) does not fall within paragraph (a), (b), or © but forms part of an accessible record as defined by section 68"

7. Section 68 concerns health, educational and public records and therefore sub-section (d) is not relevant to the present proceedings.

8. "Relevant filing system" is defined as:

"any set of information relating to individuals to the extent that, although the information is not processed by means of equipment operating automatically in response to instructions given for that purposes, the set is structured, either by reference to individuals or by reference to criteria relating to individuals, in such a way that specific information relating to a particular individual is readily accessible".

9. The claimants SAR was made in relation to bank statements and information in relation to the charges levied in an account number xxxxxx held with the defendant ("Account"). The defendant keeps this information on its automated "live" system for up to 18 months. In compliance with the SAR, and in accordance with subsection (a) of the definition of "data" under the Ac, all relevant data stored on the "live" system has been provided to the claimant.

10. After the 18-month period has elapsed, the defendant transfers the information held on the live system onto microfiche. The microfiche is then stored and, if necessary, retrieved as follows:

10.1 It is is stored in boxes covering a 2 month period (for example, January and Februsry, or March and April). There are usually 4 boxes covering each 2-month period.

10.2 Each box contains a range of account numbers, such that (by way of example only) "box 1" could cover account numbers 1-500 and "box 2" account numbers 501-900.

10.3 In the circumstances, in order to search for microfiche dating back for a period of 4 years wouls require a member of the defendant's staff to check the fronts of 96 boxes to identify the relevant boxes containing microfiche records relating to the account, then search the contents of 24 different boxes identified and finally go through an average of 450 different accounts on the particular microfiche in order to locate the specific records of the individual account.

10.4 Each piece of microfiche contains the records of a number of accounts and there is a note on the fiche itself of the range of account numbers that it covers.

10.5 The microfiche in each box are stored in numerical order, although each box contains approximately between 8,000-9,000 pieces of microfiche. \the member of staff searching for or retrieving the microfiche has to check through the boxes manually to find the relevant information sought.

10.6 Once the correct microfiche has been identified, the member of staff has to put it into the fiche reading machine and then manually find the correct account number. Once the correct account details have been located the information is then printed onto paper. This process has to be repeated for each piece of microfuche retrieved from each relevant box.

11. According, the manual microfiche storage and retrieval operations do not fall within the definition of "relevant filing system", such that the information stored as microfiche does not fall within the definition of "data" and is not covered by the provisions of the Act. The records are not stored in a manner broadly comparable with computerised records: they are not sufficiently structured nor readily accessible, they would have to be retrieved manually at great length and cost to the defendant.

12. In the premises, in not providing such information as is stored on the microfiche, the defendant has not failed fully to comply with the SAR nor is it in breach of any of its obligations pursuant to the Act.

13. Accordingly, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief from the Defendant.

SIGNED: Andrew Wilson Horton (Defendants Solicitor)

 

Well typing that out helped me concentrate on what it says....gonna compare it with others that have received the same, then get back to you.

LIP:|

[Seminole]

If things follow the normal pattern, you should receive your transaction records in a few days.

[lostinparadise]

Thanks Seminole.

I did notice that my defence was one point short of yours....

Point 13 on your defence does not appear on the defence sent to me??

13. In the circumstances, and as regards paragraph 6, it is denied that the provisions of section 15 of the Act are necessary or proportionately required to resolve the present dispute.

I look forward to receiving the transaction details!! Maybe i should wait until Monday to claim for my monetary claim. If they do arrive then i can put in the actual figure rather than an estimated one.

LIP:)

[noobrider]

apologies for my ignorance but wouldn't Abbey be forced to produce the required documentation if an estimated claim were to be defended or contested. In such circumstances does that not negate paragraph 13 and make it necessary for them to produce such documentation to resolve the dispute. If not is that an admission that they will settle the dispute without reference to the microfiche?

[CrispDust]

what continues to amaze me is the insistance by shAbbey that it is not a "relevant filing system"!

The whole crux is that they hold personal data on you, its your data and under the DPA you have a right to access that data within 40 days, Its shAbbey's choice that they choose to archive that data in an antiquated, unusable microfiche. Surely they are flouting the DPA if they, by their own decisions and incompetance, make this data inaccessable. It's their problem to sort, not ours. I really think this point should be pushed with the IC.

Imagine if I were to store my patients' records in a warehouse somewhere in Alaska - sorry Mrs Patient, I cannot provide your records within 40 days becasue there's only 1 flight in and out of the ice locked warehouse per month and we just missed it.

I hope this argument is made perfectly clear to the Court should it come to that.

Banks have for too long operated outside of the law wallowing in their own misjudged self importance - time they were brought down a notch or two:)

[joneshousehold]

CrispDust, you are absolutely on the button.

[lostinparadise]

Karnevil, the plot thickens is what comes to mind. The more i read things like this the more i am becoming a complete conspiracy theorist!!

 

Crispdust, Well shABBEY...are well...shabby!! What can i say. They are just being as obstructive as they can. They understand their position very well. They just hope we all curl up and fade....FAT CHANCE.

 

I will wait a few days to see if shABBEY send through my information as they have done with others and then put in an estimated monetary claim if i receive nothing by say Wednesday.

 

I could also put in an estimated monetary claim and ammend it once the information does arrive...im not sure yet.

 

Also waiting for the allocation questionnaire which i think i should receive soon from the court. Ill call the courts on Monday and see if its on its way.

 

LIP

[philread1]

apologies for my ignorance but wouldn't Abbey be forced to produce the required documentation if an estimated claim were to be defended or contested. In such circumstances does that not negate paragraph 13 and make it necessary for them to produce such documentation to resolve the dispute. If not is that an admission that they will settle the dispute without reference to the microfiche?

 

Yes, that is exactly how I have interpreted other threads where they have put an estimated claim in.

 

My thoughts are that if you are going to estimate your claim, then bump the figure right up, you never know, the bank might decide to pay your nice heavy figure out!

 

Somehow, I can't see it!!!

 

Good Luck!

[lostinparadise]

Hi all

Better hurry as my laptop keeps crashing.

DPA Non Compliance court action

No news on my outstanding statements im afraid.

No AQ received from the court.

Estimated Claim

So, im going to put in a claim for an estimated amount, hopefully this week if my workload allows.

Anyway, This is how im gonna work out my estimated claim:

Now that im putting a financial claim into the courts i can add 8% interest to the amounts ive been charged.

For the known information (i.e £1069 of charges over 14 statements) im going to put this into the spreadsheet as per normal with dates and type of charges incurred and let the spreadsheet work out the interest.

£1069 + interest at 8% APR (£80.54 of interest incurred in total for these 14 months)

=£1,149.54 (the spreadsheet worked this out automatically)

For the unknown information ive done this:

£1069 charges for 14 statements received

1069/14 = 76.36

£76.36 is my estimated monthly charge

Im going to put £76.36 into the spreadsheet for each month going back to April 2000 and let the spreadsheet work out the 8% interest on a monthly basis. (I'll call these charges Estimated Charges). Ive used each months last date just so that every day is captured for interest purposes.

Its taking ages and i just wanna check its the right way to do it.

Thanks

LIP

[lostinparadise]

Thanks Karnevil.

Yes i find the way they have handled your case laughable....but hey every case they handle is laughable. Makes you think how the hell they are able to run a bank.

Thanks for the reassurance! im tired...laptop keeps crashing so will complete this tomorrow.

LIP:-)

[philread1]

 

So long as you can show you worked out the estimates reasonably, and not just bumped it up to the maximum in the hope they wont try and prove otherwise, then it'll be fine.

 

Hello lip

 

My whole point about bumping an estimated figure up is so eventually the bank will give you the information that they refused you by way of the SAR, ie. statements or list of charges for the 6 years you asked. This would surely be part of their defence.

 

In that case you will have the list of charges then, and can work it all out properly. It just means the shABBEY have tried to use yet another delaying tactic to make you go away!!!!

 

Your formula for the estimate looks good, though, and I think I'll use the same on my claim.

 

Good Luck, and don't let them grind you down!!!!

Phil

[lostinparadise]

Hi All

Thanks Phil.

 

 

Received the allocation questionnaire today for the Data Protection Act non compliance claim.

 

Let you know when i hand this in to the court.

 

LIP:)

[lostinparadise]

Hi All

 

So today i received the below letter from shABBEY:

 

Thank you for your letters of 5 and 21 June 2006. Please accept my apologies for the delay in my response. I have now looked into your complaint.

 

I am sorry you feel we have given you cause to complain in relation to charges incurred on your Abbey Current Account, xxxxxx, as you feel they are unlawful under common law, statute and recent consumer regulations.

We do not believe that Abbeys charges are unfair under these regulations.

 

When you opened the account with Abbey, you were provided with the terms and conditions that detailed the charges that become applicable should you breach the terms of the account. Abbey is up front and transparent about all its bank charges as set out in the tariff of charges.

Abbeys bank account is good value and our charges compare fairly with other banks. For most people, banking is free and they do not incur penalty charges.

 

If the complaint escalates into a claim in the county court we will review each case individually, and if we feel that our relationship with our customer has broken down completely, we may decide to give notice to close the account under the Terms and Conditions.

 

I am sorry you feel you did not receive the information you requested under the Data Protection Act Subject Access Request. I confirm you have been given all the data you are entitled to under the Data Protection Act

 

I understand you requested copies of your statements from 28 May 2003. Our records show you were provided with all the transactional details that are held on our on 29 June 2006. I hope you have now received them.

 

With regards to you rcomments of the Office of Fair Trading, these were in relation to Credit Card Charge, not bank accounts.

 

Our records show you have requested information where manual intervention has occurred. You will appreciate that, first of all, not all manual interventions on your account may be recorded. For example, if a member of staff looks at a paper document relating to your account, a record of that activity will not always be made. Moreover, an “intervention” may be carried out by any one of a large number of departments in Abbey. There is no central record of such interventions because this is not the kind of information that we usually need nor, more importantly, information that a customer would normally request.

 

In addition, as you requested the Subject Access Request on 10th April 2004, we have supplied any information we had on you at that date. We did not receive notification of any legal action until 22 June 2006, which is why this was not included in the information you received.

 

You state you have incurred charges totalling £1069.00 since 28 January 2005. These charges were prompted by payment requests against insufficient available funds. As such, they are valid and in line with our Terms and Conditions.

 

I accept that yo did not set out to incur charges. Ultimately however, it is your responsibility to monitor your account and ensure there are sufficient funds in your account at all times. However, as a gesture of goodwill, I would like to offer to refund charges totalling £235.00.

 

This is my final resolution letter. If you are happy to accept this offer in full and final settlement of your complaint, then plese sign the form I have sent you and return it to me in the prepaid envelope within three weeks. I hope you feel I have made a fair decision. However, if you would like to discuss the content of this letter or have any new points you believe should be taken into account, and which may make a difference to the outcome of the investigation, please contact me within 14 days of this letter on the above number. If I do not hear from you by then, and you have not asked us to extend that deadline for any reason, I will file my papers accordingly.

 

Should you be dissatisfied with the outcome of our investigation, I would like to remind you that you can refer your complaint to the financial ombudsman service. I enclose a booklet explaining how to take your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service, and should you wish to do so, there is a time limit of six months from the date of this letter.

 

The financial ombudsman contact details are:

 

Financial Ombudsman Service

South Quay Plaza

183 Marsh Wall

London

E14 9SR

Telephone number: 08450801800

Facsimile: 02079641001

Email addres: enquiries@financial-ombudsman.org.uk

 

Yours sincerely

 

Helen Huntley

Customer Resolution Manager

Complaints

Encl. Financial Ombudsman Service Booklet

Acceptance form and prepaid envelope

 

This letter is full of errors!! ill detail them in the next post.

 

LIP:lol:

[lostinparadise]

"For most people, banking is free and they do not incur penalty charges."

Does that mean for others they do receive penalty charges?

 

"If the complaint escalates into a claim in the county court we will review each case individually, and if we feel that our relationship with our customer has broken down completely, we may decide to give notice to close the account under the Terms and Conditions."

Same old bully boy tactics...

"I am sorry you feel you did not receive the information you requested under the Data Protection Act Subject Access Request. I confirm you have been given all the data you are entitled to under the Data Protection Act "

Ermmmm only received 14 months worth and there is a full stop at the end of a sentence.

"I understand you requested copies of your statements from 28 May 2003. Our records show you were provided with all the transactional details that are held on our on 29 June 2006. I hope you have now received them."

This sentence doesnt make sense. Firstly my request was for information going back to April 2000. Secondly this looks like a copy and paste job, as the sentence doesnt make sense and i havent received any more information after the 14 months worth which was sent.

"In addition, as you requested the Subject Access Request on 10th April 2004, we have supplied any information we had on you at that date. We did not receive notification of any legal action until 22 June 2006, which is why this was not included in the information you received".

Mmmnnnn..lets see my SAR would have taken 2 years and 3 months to be looked at if this date were true...2004...LOL. The rest is just nonsense.

 

 

"I accept that yo did not set out to incur charges. Ultimately however, it is your responsibility to monitor your account and ensure there are sufficient funds in your account at all times. However, as a gesture of goodwill, I would like to offer to refund charges totalling £235.00."

LOL.....LOL.....LOL......LOL......LOL.....LOL.....LOL

"This is my final resolution letter. If you are happy to accept this offer in full and final settlement of your complaint, then plese sign the form I have sent you and return it to me in the prepaid envelope within three weeks. I hope you feel I have made a fair decision. However, if you would like to discuss the content of this letter or have any new points you believe should be taken into account, and which may make a difference to the outcome of the investigation, please contact me within 14 days of this letter on the above number. If I do not hear from you by then, and you have not asked us to extend that deadline for any reason, I will file my papers accordingly."

Oh gosh i have 3 weeks to reply but if she doesnt hear from me in 14 days she will file her papers!!! Mmmnnn mine are going in tomorrow love...LOL

 

Ok i have to respond to this crap dont i?

LIP:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

 

[Movingon]

I would simply reply saying that due to the appalling grammar and lack of care in producing this document that you are unable to understand its content, and therefore are continuing with the course of action you have already advised them you will be following.

[lostinparadise]

Thanks SL and Karnevil.

Im glad im not the only one who found this letter funny.

I will reply to them and keep it short and sweet. (i will post a copy here).

Im beginning to wonder if shABBEY owe me a lot of money, i dont have a clue. Maybe this is why they are being so obstructive.

In true LIP spirit i will keep going, lol...if only for the entertainment value....hahahahaha.

LIP:D

[lostinparadise]

Hi All

Well this morning i received printouts of transactions and charges going back to 28/11/99 in the post.

However from the 28/05/03 - 28/05/04 they have manually created a table and i cannot see what the transactions relate to. (what the amounts showing were for).

They are only detailed as either cash/visa/payment/cheque book/transfer/direct debit/charge/od charge/bank giro credit/returned cheque/od charge/so charge.

I want to see what they were for. This is my information right.

I will continue with the allocation questionnaire as i want the court costs and damages refunded. I also want the information from 28/05/03 - 28/05/04 detailed like the rest of the information provided.

Anyway, on quick inspection they have taken £4808 in charges for the last 6 years. :o :o :o ill let you know exactly once ive completed the spreadsheet.

LIP:eek:

[Kai-Boshed]

HI LIP, i'm in the same position as you I think, as the DPA request has expired so I was going to put a claim in for non DPA compliance and for the estimate which is £4.9k! I worked mine out the same as yours. Can i put one claim in for both or did you do it seperately?

[lostinparadise]

Hi Kai

Ill post a reply in your thread. (it gets confusing when you hijack a thread and post questions).

That way its easier to follow your case.

LIP:)

[lostinparadise]

Hi karnevil,

Yes i feel a bit uncomfortable about this:

 

"why do they have a problem with this information - have the records been damaged in some way ? if the records aren't available how have they got the info to retype it ? can you ask they send you the actual copies of info that they have re-typed ? Surely they have a responsibility to inform you of any problems like this."

They havent explained why this particular period of info has been sent in this particular format.

I am a little shocked at the amount. Even more shocked when i looked at how many were in the same months...even more shocked when you see how they slyly increased the charges over the yrs!!

Daylight robbery..

LIP:grin:

[eyeballto]

today i received the same table for the missing 5 months i was after.

 

earlier this week i handed in my lba which included an estimated £216 for the missing months.

 

i wonder if they have held back statements for lots of people to hold claims up???

maybe this week realised this stalling tactic wasnt actually working because people had started giving in estimated claims keeping to their timeline??

 

just a thought

 

HOLD ON JUST REALISED WHAT THEY SENT ME WAS A RESPONSE FROM A MY DPA MONTHS AGO LOLOLOL

[eyeballto]

one thing you might be interesting in regatding what i received today is!!!

 

 

in the bundle of statements i had many months that were in the table form you mention. however they have already sent me these months as statements with full infomation!!!!!!!! so the infomation you have in table form must be available as statements.

[lostinparadise]

Hi Eyeball,

Thanks for that.

Does the information on the statement match up with the information on the table?

I would be very interested to know.

LIP:rolleyes: