Andrew1 vs Abbey

[andrew1]

Early stages over, DPA letter all statements received, charges worked out, interest calculated and prelim letter requesting repayment sent. Had dreadful photocopy letter reply from Marc Winder Head of Complaints " one of my team will get back to you". Full response arrived today 3 weeks after which is the standard response with minor variations:

 

It's the basic letter many have received but I'll post it here for the new comers:

 

 

Dear Mr xxx

 

Thank you for your letter of xx May 2006. Please accept my apologies for the delay in receiving my response.

I am sorry we have given you cause to complain in relation to charges incurred on your Abbey Current Account xxxxxxxxxx.

 

I have carefully considered the points you have raised, namely that you feel the charges are contrary to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999 and are unlawful at common law. The fact remains however that the charges in question were prompted by payment requests against insufficient available funds. As such, they are valid and in line with our Terms and Conditions. Furthermore, having reviewed the history of your account, I can see this is not the first time you have incurred charges.

 

I note you say you are unhappy with the charges you have incurred over the last six years. If you felt at any time the charges were unfair or incorrect, then the matter should have been raised at that time.

 

We do not feel that Abbey’s charges are unfair under these regulations. When you opened the account with Abbey, you were provided with 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 banking charges as set out in the tariff of charges.

 

Abbey’s Current Account is good value and our charges compare fairly with other Banks. For most people, banking is free and they do not incur 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 accept that you 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.

 

As such and given that we refunded £30.00 on x September 2005 £20.00 on xx February 2006 as a gesture of goodwill, I do not feel that a waiver of charges is justified. The charges in question therefore stand.

 

The Office of Fair Trading announcement was in relation to Credit Card default charges and not overdraft default charges or to other products, such as Bank Accounts. This means our Tariff of Charges continues to apply.

This is my final resolution letter. 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.

 

 

As it states that this is their final resolution letter it doesn't look as though there's much point in making use of the offer to discuss any new points, but I'll be happy to take suggestions on that. Otherwise I think it's an LBA...any thoughts and advice greatly appreciated. Daft thing is though you always feel you are speacial and an individual - ( I must be a totally misguided kind of fellow!!!)

[Jane Austen]

Carry on with the LBA. It's the usual stalling letter to try and fob you off. Stick to your timetable!

[Michael Browne]

Yes , you are special, just not to Abbey!

 

Send the LBA, and if closing your account would create problems, think asout opening a parachute account withanother bank.

[andrew1]

I should have listened! having gone through the stages until LBA I then tried to negotiate trying to give them the opportunity of settling without the necessity of going through the court process, I wrote to Abbey with an offer to settle as a goodwill gesture for having been with them for many many years and so I tried the professional and softly softly approach. The claim is for £2300 + interest. The offer was dealt with by Customer Resolutions Manager and she was to telphone me with their response - what happened? They posted £84 ( 2x £32 & a £20 ) into my account which I noticed on my ebanking this morning, no phone call, no letter but when I phoned to find out what this money was I was told it was a a goodwill gesture :o and told me they will not refund the claim.

 

It became obvious throughout the call that the Manager had little authority to give anything by way of constructive argument and I asked her if she could confirm that the £32 they charged me each time did actually reflect their true costs or liquidated loss because that's what I'll be asking them to do in court. " I cannot comment on that" ( this is the customer resolutions manager after all !)

 

There had been no discussion about my offer with their legal department despite it being offered to SAVE their legal costs and no discussion with their legal department regarding the legality of thier actions to the customers - so why do they have a Customer Resolutions Manager or department at all?

 

This is one of the biggest issues confronting the banking world ( except surelybonds contribution to their demise! ) and this department know nothing of the legalities behind our claims.

 

Having been rejected I offered one more carrot which will be thrust towards my nether regions no doubt and that is to go and ask the legal department if they are happy for me to continue my claim through the court and come back with their answer within 24hrs. Then I will take the court action, I will also make it extremely clear to the judge that the Abbey are abusing the court system by not being prepared to make use of the opportunity to negotiate a settlement and I will go as public as I can.

 

£84 - Goodwill Gesture? Nether regions for you too! Newspapers here I come

[andrew1]

This is the letter that accompanied the £84 arrived this morning:

 

Dear xxxxxxx

 

Thank you for your letter dated 29 July 2006, about your bank charges. I am sorry you feel these contravene the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and that you are unhappy with my previous reply.

 

Having carried out a full investigation, I can assure you the charges do not contravene those regulations and therefore I cannot agree to refund all of them. However, as a gesture of goodwill, I am happy to refund charges of £84.00.

The regulations say that we must explain our charges in plain language and that we have to act in good faith, which, according to the Office of Fair Trading, means dealing fairly and openly with customers.

 

I therefore reviewed the literature and information you received when you opened your account, including the terms and conditions. This explains that charges will be applied if you do not keep to the terms of the account. Because of this, I believe we have been fair and open in telling you about them. The charges were correct, because you did not have enough money in your account to cover payments requested from it. When I looked at the history for your account I found that, unfortunately, this was not the first time this has happened.

 

I am confident that I have been fair and have taken into account all the points you made in your letter, but if you have any additional points that you would like to discuss with me, please call me on 0845 600 6014. I have enclosed a leaflet about the Financial Ombudsman Service, in case you are not happy with my investigation or decision. If so, you should contact them within six months of the date of this letter, enclosing a copy of it, as they would need this for their investigation.

Yours sincerely

Lesley Budge

Customer Resolution Manager

Enc. Financial Ombudsman Service Booklet

 

 

I offered an out of court settlement as a ' goodwill gesture' to save them money in legal costs and ultimate humiliation because of being over 20 years with them. £84 is their goodwill gesture, but the comments in the letter are more interesting as there are ASSURANCES "the charges do not contravene those regulations" how can they be assurances when they are breaking the law and know it?

[andrew1]

Transfered from Default Hell Thread -

 

I had a mortgage with Abbey for getting on 17yrs and at the time I took it out there was no requirement for signing up to supply my info to a CRA. They wrote to me about a year ago asking if I would now provide them the authority to share the info with the CRA's and of course I said " of course darlings tell the whole world" ( No I Refused!!). In June this year I changed my mortgage rate with them to a better deal and becaue I changed the mortgage rate effectively taking up a new deal they have for the first time in 20 yrs started sending my details to the CRA's. I couldn't believe it when I read my credit report. I complained and got the usual rhetoric about "well you signed up to say we can now share your data" so it stays.

I didn't have a choice, sign up for the new interest rate and share or don't sign up and pay the higher rates. Or their argument is I 'did' have a choice.

 

Am I at liberty now to write to Abbey Quoting the Data Protection Act and get them to stop processing this information

[andrew1]

This is the letter that accompanied the £84 arrived this morning:

 

 

I offered an out of court settlement as a ' goodwill gesture' to save them money in legal costs and ultimate humiliation because of being over 20 years with them. £84 is their goodwill gesture, but the comments in the letter are more interesting as there are ASSURANCES "the charges do not contravene those regulations" how can they be assurances when they are breaking the law and know it?

 

 

 

Offer through Customer Services rejected, I had them ask their legal department if they'd like to settle and save their money on court fees and they came back with " We don't deal with Customer Complaints" So, Abbey, after 20 odd years you now become what everybody else calls you SHABBY - you should be ashamed of yourselves, but the legal process is beginning and when I win, it will be splashed over every newspaper I can find the way you have treated customes like me and I hope in all hopes that you lose more and more and more business because of this forum - you make me SICK!

[dax]

Hi Andrew

Just saw your reply to a post i made in April re: solicitors fraud...I had trouble getting back into this forum for ages due to computer problem and other braindamage I was sorting out elsewhere, ie more dodgy solicitors in another matter, so just offering you sympathy for your plight and encouragement not to give up, like me...

[andrew1]

Hi Thanks Karne. I noticed the wording Lula put on the Claim form for Benson v Abbey http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/25558-benson-abbey.html and I just wondered if there was a version for the contractual interest rate that could be easily copied.

 

I have tested my patience with Abbey and now I must take the legal route which p....s..s me off after 20 odd years with them - Why did I think I might be different for some reason?

[Lula]

Andrew, I too have had 20 years with the shAbbey and now I am kicking the habit, just a big machine for making money, they dont give a stuff about customer or customer relations and it stinks!!!

[andrew1]

Do you know if anyone has written to the MD of Abbey to hold him/her to account? This Abbey forum thread has so many cases and each one is being tested to the extreme by Abbey. It's all a % game with them. All this denial that they are abiding by the law. If I got nicked for theft I wouldn't be able to continuously deny in the way Abbey and the banks are. It's a financial institutionalised disgrace that they all keep trotting out the same garbage.

 

Nat West did it on my sons claim saying they - quote "did not have an obligation to explain how its charges are calculated and they are not prepared to enter into any correspondence on this matter - the compilation is a confidential commercial matter " unquote!

 

How can they be so blind and have so much contempt for the law of the land and still blag on to anyone who writes that they are fair, reasonable and transparent? Apart from anything else, and I am quite a placid kind of guy, I am getting very angry with this blanket lying and denial and the further suffering they are putting people through, hoping most will get fed up or are not in a position to fight.

[andrew1]

So, not content with going straight in for the legal option, I still thought a word to the board might make someone sit and think so I wrote this: ( sorry if it takes a minute or two to read):

[SIZE="2"]Mr Grahame Hardie

Executive Director Retail Banking

Abbey

PO Box 5129

Milton Keynes MK9 2YN

 

 

 

 

Dear Mr Hardie,

 

Account: xxxxxxxxxxx Your ref: xxxxxxxxxxx

 

My wife and I have been Abbey account holders for circa twenty years. We have current accounts, a mortgage and ISA with your company.

 

Recently, as I am sure you are fully aware, there has been a considerable furore about unlawful bank charges being applied to customer accounts in the form of unauthorised overdraft charges, returned direct debits and returned items generally referred to as ‘penalties’.

 

Amongst 60,000 others following this exposure on an internet forum I was interested in this as I too had been subject, during a very difficult period in my life following my business collapse, of having attracted many of these charges. Not just on my current account but my mortgage too. “Were they really unlawful?” was the chant when this first arose.

 

For some months I have been studying these forums and followed step by step the dilemma people have been going through to try to prove that these charges, for whatever reason they were applied were, under common law a penalty. As a penalty and an automated penalty at that, they have, under common law to only represent the actual cost and not become a profitable charge. It is not difficult to come to terms with that anymore than a speeding fine.

 

Having witnessed some very public cases against all banks not just the Abbey, but the Abbey non the less have, for the very same reason as my own put up no defence to these charges and repaid back to customers significant amounts of money. The forum I follow has already, in a little under eight months seen over two million pounds refunded to customers.

 

However, I have been desperately disappointed to witness the actions of certain institutions subjecting their customers and ex-customers to the full force of denial through their customer service teams, that these very laws exist and thereafter making customers go through the whole stressful and unnecessary steps of the legal system to fundamentally get returned what has been unlawfully taken. If one has ever experienced this you will know that financial worries are the precursor to divorce, suicide, mental breakdown, family breakdown, property repossession and much, much more so the thought of going through the court system to many is just too much to contemplate.

 

That in itself, I believe is being used by these financial institutions to limit the repayment payout because for every one which gets to that court stage one hundred will not have the strength or mental ability, verbal agility or energy to do the same which I regret I have a considerable issue with.

Having been with the bank for so long, a loyal customer I like to believe, despite having one or two ‘run - ins’ with your underwriting team, I thought that loyalty actually stood for something.

Being a businessman myself I know how important that is.

 

I duly filed a claim after reviewing my statements and found £2227 plus £63.46 of interest was taken. Adding 8% relative interest on to that the claim would exceed £3125 plus court costs and filing costs etc. (at contractual rates that would be more ) and, that will all be paid out because that is exactly what you are doing to everyone who is taking the claim through the system.

 

No bank to date has taken and won any case in the courts for one very simple reason – they would have to disclose their true cost and they will not do that because the walls will come a tumbling down. Full disclosure would cripple them.

 

So why am I writing to you? Well, I made an offer as a goodwill gesture of £2750 to settle my claim without the unnecessary court costs and as I have been a good customer of Abbey for so long and I trusted them with my fiduciary and we were getting along just fine. So I thought that meant something. In my naive way I actually thought you would spare me the necessity of having to sue the people I have done business with for all these years. I am writing Mr Hardie to let you know what you are doing to your customer’s lives.

 

Lesley Budge your Customer Services Manager, a very pleasant lady indeed but one bereft of any knowledge of the unlawful nature of what she is putting her name to wrote and presented me with an £84 ‘goodwill gesture’ and told me to run off to the ombudsman.

 

Mr Hardie, you are a very senior man in the bank and I am sure you have had these issues brought to your attention so please, what do you think about these charges? Are you prepared to tell me exactly what your true costs are so that I can go back to my forum and stop 60,000 people from working on their claims, because that is all they are all looking for. All of us would quietly slide into the background and leave you to your profession if you just do that one thing.

 

I am very angry that the banks and the Abbey in particular are pushing people to have to go to the very brink of their tolerances to challenge you and it is inhuman what is being done.

 

I invite you to visit the website http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk to read for yourself the traumatising cases and experiences on there. You might also amuse yourself with the cut and pasted letters from your staff on the site and the comments that follow. The repetitive nature of them, the inaccuracies, the complete ambivalence to the whole issue and the blind responses your staff are having to tell your customers, frankly you are a laughing stock on there I am sorry to say.[/i]( see answer below!)

 

There have been many bank workers visiting the site, (although you might be in trouble if you do not say you are from a bank), giving inside information about the working practices. Issues such as the Data Protection Act being discussed in connection with Credit Reference agencies, we have the Official Customer Relations Manager/spokesman of Experian came on to defend their service. He very quickly vanished when it was realised he was completely wrong about the Act he felt he was defending and was put very squarely in his place by someone with intimate knowledge of the Act who promptly demonstrated by using the extracts from the Act itself that the CRA’s had no right to process our data let alone for the six years thereafter which you people so heavily rely. The argument supported by the Information Commissioner and Ombudsman’s letters confirming same. Believe me it is an enlightening experience and an empowering one too.

 

I will not take up any more of your time, but your banks’ nickname on the net is Shabbey. The bank rates as one of the worst in so far as ‘care over this issue and is treated with some distain for the manner in which you are defending your position. Surely you can do something about this?

 

I am a lone voice with a simple request, I just want what is lawfully mine and unlawfully taken, I want to trust the people I do business with and I’d really like to see on my forum a change in attitude by the bank to this injustice so that ordinary folk can get on with their lives without fear.

In January this year there were two chaps in a pub having a drink who were mad at being charged bank charges at £30 for a returned cheque, they were lone voices too – now they have a website forum and 60,000+ members growing daily and they have brought the banking world to their feet.

So maybe my lone voice will not appear so alone anymore and this letter might be the seed of something about to change.

 

Might I invite you to take a moment or two with one of your legal team and find out exactly what is going on here, you have a respectable career with RBS & NatWest behind you to protect and you ought to establish exactly what is being done in your name.

 

It is no comfort to be trading with a company for so long and to be standing back watching it ridiculed by so many in this way.

 

Personally, I would just like my money refunded and I would, like any self respecting person to get on with life working for and with people who can be held in trust. Fighting like this is not healthy for anyone and I reiterate my distain at the way others are being treated who are less fortunate than most and have been subjected to high interest, punitive charges, debt collection agencies (the scourge of society) and underhand practices.

 

Maybe the banks didn’t realise they were breaking the law, it’s highly unlikely but always a possibility, with all the lawyers at your disposal, and maybe this has come as a big shock to them – but the law is the law and it is a very simple law to get to understand – for a service you can charge what you like that’s the competitive nature of business – for a penalty you can only charge what it costs (liquidated loss) you cannot make a profit from it, be it £32 or £12 if it cost 50p that’s all you can charge. It can be in as many terms and conditions as you like to print but it will never supersede the law.

 

Maybe you can have a word with the lovely Ms Budge and get her to refund my money and restore a little faith in my trading partner and then listen to its’ customers in the outside world and what the Abbey is doing to it.

 

I am not expecting a response from you and I have had to commence with my claim but it would be a step in the right direction if you demonstrated exactly what ‘goodwill’ actually meant.

 

I hope you learn something from all this, but if denial is the way you feel is going forward just ask yourself what this is going to cost when after you are forced into court to answer a request for full disclosure you find the next step for the 60,000 of us is to prove you knew what you were doing (and it’s only a matter of time) then the Statute of Limitation vanishes out of the window – think about that one, six years will feel like yesterday under the weight of claims going way, way back.

 

Thank you for your time.

Yours sincerely[/size][/2][/size]

 

Well Mr Hardie didn't you do well for a senior executive of a big bank, this is going to look wonderful on your c.v.

 

I referred to the cut and paste of your staff, you didn't have either the manners or the guts to answer my letter you delegated to a pleb and this is what she answered in YOUR name:

Complaints

Abbey

PD Box 5129

Milton Keynes

MK9 2YN

Tel: 0845 600 6014 Fax: 0845 600 1378

Typetalk: 18001 0845 600 6014 Email: customerservicesabbey.com

Mrxxxxxx

 

 

 

15 September 2006

Our Ref: xxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Dear Mr xxxxxxx

 

 

Thank you for writing to Abbey’s Executive Director of the Retail Banking Division Graeme Hardie, on 8 September 2006. Graeme has passed your correspondence to me and asked that I respond to you on his behalf.

I understand you believe our charges contravene the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations. I can confirm this is not the case. The regulations say that we must explain our charges in plain language and that we have to act in good faith, which, according to the Office of Fair Trading, means dealing fairly and openly with customers.

I therefore reviewed the literature and information you received when opening the account, including the terms and conditions. This explains that charges will be applied if you do not keep to the terms of the account. Because of this, I believe we have been fair and open in telling you about them. The charges were correct, because you did not have enough money in your account to cover payments requested from it.

Based on the above information, I can confirm I am not prepared to change our decision or offer a refund of any further charges. I realise this will not be the decision you were hoping for, however I trust it has now clarified our position. We will not be able to correspond with you any further on this matter.

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Jemma Abel

Senior Customer Resolution Manager [/2]

 

 

 

Mr Hardie you ought to be ashamed of yourself, this is an absolute disgrace and you should

seriously consider your position! I'll see you in court!

 

.

[andrew1]

Can anyone tell me if Shabby have the ability to provide statements back to the day I opened the account 20yrs ago? I am going to go for the lot - I'm sick of them. I had my 6yrs worth but I could do with the previous ones.

 

I've had too much going on of late to have followed up my previous letters but now's the time

[andrew1]

Anyone?

[andrew1]

Bumpty, bumpty, bump ? Anyone at all

[sam78]

Hi,

I think there's some form of limitation which means you can only request a refund for the last six years.

[andrew1]

Hi,

I think there's some form of limitation which means you can only request a refund for the last six years.

 

Thanks Sam78, nice to know there's life out there ! I know theres a six year limitation, but I wanted to know if Abbey in particular would be able to supply statements going back beyond the six years. If you haven't picked up on the other threads there are discussions about going way back yonder in time to claim, I just wanted to know if anyone had managed to get their statements any further back than 6 years, which is what I have already had from Abbey and I was hoping someone on the Abbey threads might be able to tell me..

[andrew1]

" Can anyone tell me if Shabby have the ability to provide statements back to the day I opened the account 20yrs ago? I am going to go for the lot - I'm sick of them. I had my 6yrs worth but I could do with the previous ones."

 

 

 

Could do with an absolute answer on this if anyone has one .... anyone?

 

 

.

[Lula]

Andrew, go and take a look at my thread Lula v abbey (3)

[debt_mountain]

Nice to talk to you about a different subject fora change.

 

I have (had) a similar case with LCydesdale and using the 6 year information and knowing when the account was started (They told me in their defence) I exrapolated the 6 year dta to a month amount and back tracked to day 1.

 

I then used this in the prelim and the LBA and then the N1 as each time they just kept saying statute barred. When it got to the N1 they then sent me the full set of satements before the 6 year limit. I am assuming they plan on trying to get me in trouble with the judge, but I did give the the prelim and LBA to sort it out.

 

It has not yet gone to vcourt but at least I now have the full set of data.

 

This is the same as I did with my 2nd claim against MBNA and they just called me and said the estimate was too high and here is what they think it should be.

 

Estimating can't really hurt, they have to either provide the correct info or stump up the missing statements and admit that the SAR was incomplete. Win Win.

 

DM

[andrew1]

Nice to talk to you about a different subject fora change.

 

I have (had) a similar case with LCydesdale and using the 6 year information and knowing when the account was started (They told me in their defence) I exrapolated the 6 year dta to a month amount and back tracked to day 1.

 

 

Estimating can't really hurt, they have to either provide the correct info or stump up the missing statements and admit that the SAR was incomplete. Win Win.

 

DM

 

Hi Dm - yes what a change, but I don't think Abbey are any better!

 

How exactly did you get the statements prior to 6yrs? When I did my SAR I only asked for the six years, but I've had the account for 20 yrs nearly and there must be some ripe charges in there to get back if I can.

 

My interpretation of the 6yrs is this, I haven't heard anyone say any arguments against this but, I feel anyway the limitation should be on the basis from when we find out about the crime . ie: If I find out today the bank have charged me unlawful charges I have 6yrs in which to claim not that they can only go back 6yrs. My feeling is that if these charges are unlawful then I should be able to go back as far as I can until the account opened - trouble is estimating 14 yrs is a bit difficult and I shredded all my old statements ironically just before I found CAG. I was wondering if Abbey can actually refuse to supply them or if anyone else has actually retreived them from Abbey off Microfiche or something.

[Lula]

Andrew, Abbey are trying to say that they destroy everything over 6 years old, yeah right. Also the Statute of Limitations states that they Statute can be disregarded if the people imposing the charge have a) made a mistake or b) charged a penalty that are not a reflection of true costss, so either way we have them over a barrell. There is also something in the Data Protection Act that says if they have indeed destroyed the information you are quite within your rights to ask for a certificate of destruction - this is what I am going to be doing, might be nice if someone else stepped up the pressure on this also

[andrew1]

You're on Lula - I'm in there !

 

Would I need to send a new SAR ? ( sorry, I've been bashing Cabot for too long and have lost the run of the mill stuff !) or can I just write following the request from my 1st SAR request?

[andrew1]

Well, I telephoned (Using my Abbey 0800 731 7774 freephone number ( make note folks ! )and asked for statements back to '91 - and the very kind young lady, shocked though she was and somewhat at pains to tell me what 'leaglly' they are allowed to do and keep - get that? - LEGALLY! :o (soon put her right there ! " don't talk to me about leaglly what the banks should do" ) so she put in my request and no doubt they will all come winging their way via royal mail very soon ! I'm told they might only have up to 7 yrs so I have requested that if the documents have been destroyed they duly send me the Certificate of Destructions as per Lula's instruction ( I didn't even know about Certs of Destruction! - thanks Lula.) Needless to say, she hesitated to ask me if there was anything else she could do for me and apart from a Gin & Tonic says I - No thanks! Lets see

[debt_mountain]

Hi Dm - yes what a change, but I don't think Abbey are any better!

 

How exactly did you get the statements prior to 6yrs? When I did my SAR I only asked for the six years, but I've had the account for 20 yrs nearly and there must be some ripe charges in there to get back if I can.

 

My interpretation of the 6yrs is this, I haven't heard anyone say any arguments against this but, I feel anyway the limitation should be on the basis from when we find out about the crime . ie: If I find out today the bank have charged me unlawful charges I have 6yrs in which to claim not that they can only go back 6yrs. My feeling is that if these charges are unlawful then I should be able to go back as far as I can until the account opened - trouble is estimating 14 yrs is a bit difficult and I shredded all my old statements ironically just before I found CAG. I was wondering if Abbey can actually refuse to supply them or if anyone else has actually retreived them from Abbey off Microfiche or something.

my poc wording was

 

5. . The Claimant contends that: the defendant has concealed and continues to conceal that these charges are debited are unlawful and are not statute barred as described under section 32(1)(b), or section 32(1)©, of the Limitation Act 1980 should apply, and the charges debited are therefore within the primary limitation period,

 

I am just going for the 8% and in my sar I had said "Please supply me with a complete list of transactions and charges relating to my banking history with your organisation. Alternatively, a complete set of statements for that period will be acceptable." they only sent 6 years worth so I then sent an sar part 2 saying

 

"On the 29 August 2006 I sent a letter requesting our Subject Access Request under the Data protection act, but since then I have found that you have to supply all information you hold on us, not just the last 6 years. Please provide all of the information you have on file upto the date you have previously supplied.

 

As I have already paid the £10 fee I and my request was not fully complied with I do not expect to have to make any further payment.

 

As this is a followup to a previous request and the original 40 day have expired I expect an full response with data with 14 days, afterwhich time I will be seeking further advice."

 

as I said before they have to either provide the correct info or stump up the missing statements and admit that the SAR was incomplete.

 

they then stumped up everything they had.

 

You can after 6 months (I am sure I read that in the DPA) send a new SAR and they have to start all over again.

 

DM