A few questions about DPA Court Process

[Nightmare4banks]

Hi all!

 

I have written the DPA request to several of my creditors and sent the £10s.

 

I have received various responses(negative/incomplete) - which I would be very grateful if someone could clarify the way forward.

 

THE RESPONSES

 

1.MBNA sent me one sheet of paper with a list of the charges and refunded the £10.Requesting that I fill in a particular sheet,sign it and include id i.e.passport and proof of address plus enclose the £10 I had already sent!(This is despite my letter requested everything! as per written in template letter in the library on this site.)

 

I consider this a delaying tactic mainly based on my previous dealings with MBNA.

 

2.STYLECARD sent all the statements dated back 7 years but cannot find around 10 of these monthly statements throughout this period i.e.May 99 - May 06.

This really concerns me.

 

3.BARCLAYCARD sent all the statements dating back 2 years only (May 04 - May 06) saying that the previous statements do not fall under the DPA 1998 - I will quote the exact words of the letter:

 

"Statements that are prior to this date are not held on a computer system or

a structured filing system and therefore,they do not fall under the Data Protection Act 1998.They can be obtained from our Customer Services Dept at a cost of £3 per statement."

 

This means this would cost me 3x12x4 = £144!!!!

 

All views and opinions are highly appreciated.

 

Many thanks in advance.

[diddled]

The term "relevant filing system" appears to have been conjured up with the intention of meaning the ease with which data are readily accessible.

I believe that if statement information prior to a given date is held for customers in a different system (whether manual or electronic) that set of information would constitute a relevant filing system for the purpose of the DPA. If this set of information was not stuctured or indexed in a way in which the account holder could be readily identified it would be impossible to manually retrieve statements for £3 per sheet.

These banks must think we are all idiots!

[alanfromderby]

I appreciate these matters may well have now been dealt with - but will answer anyway as it may be a help to others:

 

1.MBNA sent me one sheet of paper with a list of the charges and refunded the £10.Requesting that I fill in a particular sheet,sign it and include id i.e.passport and proof of address plus enclose the £10 I had already sent!(This is despite my letter requested everything! as per written in template letter in the library on this site.)

 

I consider this a delaying tactic mainly based on my previous dealings with MBNA.

 

How long did they wait before sending this letter?

 

If it was done within 14-days then it is probably reasonable, and I would send the requested info along with a stern letter suggesting that they should now action the matter without any further delay.

 

 

2.STYLECARD sent all the statements dated back 7 years but cannot find around 10 of these monthly statements throughout this period i.e.May 99 - May 06.

This really concerns me.

 

Estimate the missing period, and make a note on your claim to say why you have had to do this. Make a complaint to the IC as losing data is in breach of one of the key principles of data protection as outlined in Schedule 1 of the DPA.

 

 

3.BARCLAYCARD sent all the statements dating back 2 years only (May 04 - May 06) saying that the previous statements do not fall under the DPA 1998 - I will quote the exact words of the letter:

 

"Statements that are prior to this date are not held on a computer system or

a structured filing system and therefore,they do not fall under the Data Protection Act 1998.They can be obtained from our Customer Services Dept at a cost of £3 per statement."

 

This means this would cost me 3x12x4 = £144!!!!

 

 

They do fall under the DPA, and the bank should be referred to Smith v Lloyds/TSB. If they fail to provide the info then action should be considered through the County Court to force compliance.

[JonCris]

I appreciate these matters may well have now been dealt with - but will answer anyway as it may be a help to others:

 

 

 

How long did they wait before sending this letter?

 

If it was done within 14-days then it is probably reasonable, and I would send the requested info along with a stern letter suggesting that they should now action the matter without any further delay.

 

 

 

Estimate the missing period, and make a note on your claim to say why you have had to do this. Make a complaint to the IC as losing data is in breach of one of the key principles of data protection as outlined in Schedule 1 of the DPA.

 

 

 

They do fall under the DPA, and the bank should be referred to Smith v Lloyds/TSB. If they fail to provide the info then action should be considered through the County Court to force compliance.

 

Correct I understand that the banks are relying on a previous judgement in which it was decided that because a business didn't have much of a filling system just a bunch of paper files scattered throughout their offices they where not relevant & the cost of collation was disproportionet.

 

More bad law written by some judges which seeks to frustrate the will of parliament But it doesn't apply here thank gawd:smile:

[alanfromderby]

Correct I understand that the banks are relying on a previous judgement in which it was decided that because a business didn't have much of a filling system just a bunch of paper files scattered throughout their offices they where not relevant & the cost of collation was disproportionet.

 

More bad law written by some judges which seeks to frustrate the will of parliament But it doesn't apply here thank gawd:smile:

 

Actually it is more like a bank misinterpreting a fairly clear piece of case-law. Smith v Lloyds/TSB clarified unequivocally the difference between a pile of papers in a box, and a filing system that had enough of a structure to make it possible for information to be located within it.

 

My feeling has always been that the staff employed to administer the Data Protection Act have generally had a very basic knowledge of the Act, and certainly were not up to speed on case-law. Indeed many people consider a Data Protection staff to be glorified librarians. It is only in the last three months that they have been suddenly thrust into the midst of a legal minefield.

 

The other argument that you mentioned is another that is being abused by the banks.

 

"Disproportionate effort" was never intended to be used as an argument in cases such as ours. In some situations an SAR could fetch up van loads of information - most of which would be irrelevant to the question the person was trying to research. In this case the Data Processor would be justified in asking for specifics - and only providing what was relevant.

 

A small company with say, ten staff and an old microfiche system, may be able to argue that it would take them a whole day to produce 500 printouts. Therefore, if a hundred customers where to ask for the data their company would face serious financial hardship, again this could be accepted as disproportionate effort.

 

That same argument could not be applied to a modern bank - especially when, in the same letter, they go on to say that the information can be supplied...but at a price!

[Nightmare4banks]

This topic was closed on 11 March 2019.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group