alanfromderby Alliance & Leicester update

[alanfromderby]

Off we go.

 

DPA letter sent to Alliance & Leicester today, for what will be a very interesting and potentially groundbreaking claim.

 

The account was closed in 1999 and is now subject to a CCJ which is being paid by monthly installments. I am aiming to question the validity of the original judgement since a large part of the debt was due to unlawful charges.

 

I will keep you posted of progress.

[alanfromderby]

Alliance & Leicester will have missed the 40-day deadline for DPA compliance on Monday. This leaves me in a strange position, as the original account was closed around 1998/9, but then in early 2002 a CCJ was obtained, which is now subject to a very small monthly repayment via their solicitors (Bryan CArter & Co).

 

I know for certain that the original debt had a large percentage of fees included within it - but I presume they are going to eventually say that they cannot provide information that old.

 

This leaves a potentially tricky situation legally, as I am certain that the court will not accept a set-aside so far down the line - especially as an application was made to suspend a warrant and vary the originally imposed repayments in 2003.

 

Clearly I have to send the DPA Letter Before Action, but do have this feeling that I might be heading down a blind alley with this one.

 

As they have the debt established by a CCJ I cannot play the Consumer Credit Act card, and if I cannot get hold of the transactional information, I cannot prove that there were any unlawful charges - even though I know for a fact that there were a lot.

 

Any thoughts?

[caro]

They must have had the information when they claimed the CCJ which was within the last 6 years, so surely if you are still having to pay they must still have the details from the original debt. If they don't have these details they would be hard pressed to prove you still owe anything I would have thought. Under the DP Act, surely you still have the right to access any information they hold about you.

 

I have no legal experience, and know nothing of the processes involved, but could you try something with the courts along the lines of "it is now clear that charges are unlawful and in the light of the OFT report the situation has changed, and you believe this debt was largely due to unlawful charges which the court should not be enforcing or condoning. Please look at bank records and ensure the debt is lawful and if not force A&L to return money".

 

I guess it depends how far you want to take it as it is uncharted territory.

[alanfromderby]

I guess it depends how far you want to take it as it is uncharted territory.

 

I want to take it as far as I possibly can - the problem I have is that I don't want to file papers at court only to get them struck out. Certainly you have raised a good point about the documents used for the legal proceedings of 2002. That is very useful, thanks.

 

My feelings are that I will press on with a DPA action, especially bearing in mind the point you have raised. Hopefully, that will reach a position where we can open a dialogue and do some negotiations over reducing the balance owed.

 

Worth a try.

[lookinforinfo]

In the normal; course of events your account would have been deleted/erased

after the 6/7 year qualifying period.

 

However, your account from then is still live since not only is there is an amount

outstanding but it is being consistently being reduced.

And they will need to keep the data on file a] to prove their is a debt: b] to

confirm it is a bad debt [should you not eventually redeem the whole amount]

to the Inland Revenue so it can be written off: and c] the auditors will need the

record to confirm their balance sheet and that thepayments you are making are

registered on the account, properly accounted for and tallied.

 

By that reckoning they would have to keep all the documents relating to the debt.

[alanfromderby]

In the normal; course of events your account would have been deleted/erased

after the 6/7 year qualifying period.

 

However, your account from then is still live since not only is there is an amount

outstanding but it is being consistently being reduced.

And they will need to keep the data on file a] to prove their is a debt: b] to

confirm it is a bad debt [should you not eventually redeem the whole amount]

to the Inland Revenue so it can be written off: and c] the auditors will need the

record to confirm their balance sheet and that thepayments you are making are

registered on the account, properly accounted for and tallied.

 

By that reckoning they would have to keep all the documents relating to the debt.

 

Interesting, and thanks also for the input. I have the DPA Letter Before Action ready to go off on Tuesday, and we will see what happens.

 

Bearing in mind what you say it would be very difficult to see how they could defend an action under the DPA, when the County Court will hold evidence (indeed the same County Court where the case was dealt with) that they have produced letters, documents, and would have had to rely on transactional data for their 2002 action.

[lookinforinfo]

I don't see how how they can do other than admit they have your rercords.

Without them they cannot prove you still [or ever] owed them money]. Either

way you win something.

[alanfromderby]

I don't see how how they can do other than admit they have your rercords.

Without them they cannot prove you still [or ever] owed them money]. Either

way you win something.

 

The trouble is that legally they don't have to prove the debt anymore as it is already the subject of a CCJ.

[chrismc]

I don't see how how they can do other than admit they have your rercords.

Without them they cannot prove you still [or ever] owed them money]. Either

way you win something.

Alan

 

I am in a similar position to you, 30-40% made up of charges, only that my debt and CCJ is not as old, but I am new to this so was looking for advice also. But some of what lookinforinfo has merit, I am going to send off a DPA tomorrow anyway as I don't see as I have anything to loose.

 

But if you read my post from a day or so ago, lickthewallfatboy vbmenu_register("postmenu_64586", tr also makes some valid comments. I would also be obliged for any thoughts you may have, here is my post http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=8777 if it helps??

 

 

Thanks

Chris

[lookinforinfo]

Quote=alanfromderby;The trouble is that legally they don't have to prove the debt anymore as it is already the subject of a CCJ. Unquote

 

Fine. But surely the Court cannot refuse to reopen the case since your claim

will be that you have just discovered that part of the debt included allegedly

unlawful charges which should not have been levied. And would have [in view of

the current refusal of banks to defend their charges to this day] not been accepted

by the Court at the time had it and you been in full possession of the facts.

[alanfromderby]

Certainly I am going to seek a set-aside, but I am going to leave it until I have gone through the DPA process. It can only help my case if I have to take enforcement action over the DPA - it all helps to paint a picture.

[chrismc]

Certainly I am going to seek a set-aside, but I am going to leave it until I have gone through the DPA process. It can only help my case if I have to take enforcement action over the DPA - it all helps to paint a picture.

 

Yes I am looking at doing the same, sent of my DPA request today, so I will see what happens. Plus I just heard from someone else today who successfully wrote to the court in question stating that they had new information that they didnt have at the time of service, and wanted to dispute the amount.

 

The court sent back loads of forms for them to fill out to apply to have it removed and apparantly this request was carried out.

 

 

Chris

[alanfromderby]

I just heard from someone else today who successfully wrote to the court in question stating that they had new information that they didnt have at the time of service, and wanted to dispute the amount.

 

The court sent back loads of forms for them to fill out to apply to have it removed and apparantly this request was carried out.

 

 

Chris

 

 

That's very interesting - do you have any details, links etc.

[chrismc]

Alan

 

It was someone from this site, I will pm you.

 

Chris

[alanfromderby]

Reply from Alliance & Leicester today saying that the reason they have not responded to my DPA request was because they have not received it......funny, according to Royal Mail it was delivered on 15th April!!

 

Oh dear!

 

A VERY strongly worded reply will be on it's way on Monday...along with a demand that they action by next weekend, or it will be off to court for yet another Data Protection Act case.

 

I am not being p****d about by these people anymore - if they want to play silly b*****s then they can do it in front of a Distrct Judge!

[alanfromderby]

My considered response:

 

 

 

Mr M Boyes

Alliance & Leicester plc

Service Delivery & Improvement

Room T268, 2nd Ops

Bridle Road,

Bootle

GIR 0AA

 

5th June 2006

 

 

LETTER BEFORE ACTION – Data Protection Act 1998 – FINAL WARNING

Dear Mr Boyes

 

Alliance & Leicester Giro Account: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

I refer to your letter dated 1st June 2006.

 

I am disappointed that you claim to have no trace of my Data Subject Access Request. For your information it was sent by Recorded Delivery (DKxxxxxxxx3GB), and is confirmed by Royal Mail as delivered on 15th April 2006 - also enclosed was a postal order (xxxx xxxxxx) for the £10 fee, being correct payment for this request.

 

I consider the “loss” of this item to be careless handling of an official document, and is in itself a breach of one of the key Principles of Data Protection as outlined in Schedule 1 of the Data Protection Act 1998, because your internal organisation has failed to deal with a valid DSAR in a proper and secure manner.

 

For your information, my original request was for a complete list of transactions and charges relating to any accounts held in my name. As an alternative, a complete set of account statements will be acceptable.

Additionally where there has been any event in my account history which required manual intervention by any member of your staff or any other person, I require disclosure of any indication or notes which have either caused or resulted in that manual intervention or other evidence of that manual intervention in relation to my banking business with you.

 

If you are unable to supply data relating to manual intervention because there has been no such manual intervention, please confirm this in your response to this request.

 

Take notice that no further delay will be tolerated in this matter. If I do not receive the required information within the next 7 days I shall issue an action under section 7 and section 15(2) of the Data Protection Act 1998 to force your compliance. This will be commenced without any further notice on Monday 12th June.

 

I have completed the Subject Access Request form that you have sent – although please understand that the Act does not place any obligation on me to complete such a form. Should you still claim not to have received the original payment I require that you send me a certified guarantee that the above mentioned postal order has not been processed.

Yours faithfully,

[caro]

Looks good to me. Regarding the postal order, I think you can take the stubs to the post office and confirm whether it has been cashed or banked. There must be some way of checking or it would be no safer to post than cash.

[alanfromderby]

Looks good to me. Regarding the postal order, I think you can take the stubs to the post office and confirm whether it has been cashed or banked. There must be some way of checking or it would be no safer to post than cash.

 

If only it were that simple!

 

You have to fill out a form P58 and send with the counterfoil to Royal Mail. A week or so later they will let you know!!

[chrismc]

Sounds very good Alan.....lets hope they now take notice and realise you are not bluffing. I like the FINAL WARNING you can bet banks are not used to being teated like they treat their customers

[chrismc]

If only it were that simple!

 

You have to fill out a form P58 and send with the counterfoil to Royal Mail. A week or so later they will let you know!!

 

Is it worth pursuing that anyway, if they have cashed it then that would add weight to your case if it eventually goes to court. They will just show themselves up as a bunch of liars.

[Movingon]

Is it worth pursuing that anyway, if they have cashed it then that would add weight to your case if it eventually goes to court. They will just show themselves up as a bunch of incompetents.

 

**FIXED**

[chrismc]

**FIXED**

 

Yes that is a much better word!!

[alanfromderby]

Is it worth pursuing that anyway, if they have cashed it then that would add weight to your case if it eventually goes to court. They will just show themselves up as a bunch of liars.

 

I am certainly in no great hurry to pursue this - but will wait to see how they respond. Certainly if this ends up in court it will be useful evidence if it has been cashed.

 

My gut feeling is that it is still with the original request letter near the bottom of somebodies in-tray - but that is their problem, not mine!

[alanfromderby]

Do I, dont't I?

 

Got a response today from my DPA Final demand Letter (posted above) saying that they are now actioning my DPA request, and saying that they don't really know if the postal order has been cashed, or not!!

 

The letter does not make any apology whatsoever, and only states that the data will be sent "as soon as possible" - this despite my letter stating that the information should reach me by Monday at the latest.

 

Have to have a think over the weekend how to tackle this one - giving them reasonable time is one thing - allowing them to take the p**s is another!

[chrismc]

Do I, dont't I?

 

Got a response today from my DPA Final demand Letter (posted above) saying that they are now actioning my DPA request, and saying that they don't really know if the postal order has been cashed, or not!!

 

The letter does not make any apology whatsoever, and only states that the data will be sent "as soon as possible" - this despite my letter stating that the information should reach me by Monday at the latest.

 

Have to have a think over the weekend how to tackle this one - giving them reasonable time is one thing - allowing them to take the p**s is another!

 

Why not write stating they are now out of time, however you are willing to give them a further 7 days to satisfy your request under S7 DPA and that after 7 days you will take further action without further notice.

 

That way you are being fair but also giving them a last chance to comply by a target date, they cannot then take for ever, they know they are on notice and if it ever goes to court you could use this as another weapon in your armoury.

 

Just a thought, what do you think?

 

Chris