Don't want to settle unless Default guaranteed to be removed

[nocredit]

Think I will wait for the ICO to deal with it as the ICO told me that if I start court action I need to inform the ICO as they will not deal with the case if it is also being heard in court.

Is it worth informing London Scottish that it has been referred to ICO?

[car2403]

Yes - send them a copy of your complaint form, as it might take the ICO a while to contact them.

 

Never know, it might give them the "jump" they need - don't hold your breath though.

[nocredit]

to be honest i'd be willing to offer settlement if i thought they'd remove default; i have a reasonable wage now but cant get reasonable rates for mortgage or car loan so settling would save me a lot in the long run.

However, without the SAR data I'm not sure how much of the default amount is charges (I estimate it to be about £450 for received goods & £200 charges) & I think it'd undermine any future court action against london scottish if I started offering payment.

any thoughts on this?

also can anyone point me to threads that cover defaults removed as a result of ICO intervention?

[car2403]

They are unlikely to remove the Default just because you offer a short settlement - they might mark it as "satisfied", but that doesn't really help your credit rating, as a satisfied Default is still a Default. (It will help you reduce your overall indebtedness, which can effect things like income and expense workouts, but that's of little use, IMHO)

 

You will need to do that SAR to get the information about charges - without that you can't challenge the Default amount as incorrect. Or, rather, you can, but you won't have a basis for doing so without evidence.

 

Making payments, or offering reduced settlement, won't prevent them taking enforcement action - only a dispute as to the Default amount, (see what I've said above) would be effective in doing that. (Note: it won't prevent them taking enforcement action, but it will give you a defence if they do)

 

Have a look through the Default sub-forum, here;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/data-protection-default-issues/

 

There's also some success stories here;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/data-protection-default-issues/124065-default-removal-successes.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/data-protection-default-issues/103974-roll-call-who-has.html

 

I haven't seen any as a result of an ICO decision, but then I haven't read them all neither!

 

I think the ICO is not the best way to go, as I've said in post #47 above.

[nocredit]

Here is the letter I received today from the Information Commissioners Office. Seems like they can't be bothered reading the complaints properly or writing individual replies; this letter reads like a leaflet! (My own comments are in red font)

 

Dear Ms H

Complaint to The Information Commissioners Office about unfair penalty charges ( I didn't complain about unfair charges but never mind!) and your subject access request to London Scottish Bank Plc for information held as part of credit/ bank account statements.

Is a subject access request necessary in order to reclaim any unfair penalty charges?

No. Information from credit card/bank statements should not be needed in order to reclaim any unfair penalty charges from a financial institution.

Following an Office of Fair Trading (OFT) ruling about 'unfair penalty charges' relating to credit card accounts, the number of individuals making subect access requests under the Data Protection Act 1998 for information held as part of credit card statements has increased significantly. Although the OFT ruling only relates to credit card accounts a number of individuals are also making subject access requests for information relating to other financial services befrore attempting to reclaim any penalty charges associated with them. Many financial institutions are struggling (my heart bleeds for them- not!) to respond to these S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) within the 40 calendar days permitted. We are aware of this and are monitoring the situation closely.

Whats the best way to reclaim penalty charges?

The Financial Ombudsman Service is the most appropriate organisation to assist you when seeking to settle disputes about unfair penalty charges with London Scottish Bank Plc. The FOS can be contacted on 0845 080 1800 Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.

The FOS was set up by Parliament as an independant, free service for settling disputes between businesses providing financial services & their customers.

Complaints about unfair penalty charges fall outside of the remit of the Information Commissioners Office. This is why we are unable to assist you in seeking the repayment of these charges. (I didnt ask for help reclaiming charges I asked for my SAR data as the default is unlawful!!)

What will the Information Commissioners Office now do with your complaint about the failed SAR?

We acknowledge that in pursuing the unfair penalty charges a valid SAR was made to London Scottish Bank Plc & although the information requested may not be needed to recover any unfair penalty charges, financial institutions are still required to provide it.

From the information you have provided to us it seems unlikely that London Scottish Bank Plc have complied with their obligations under the Data Protection Act on this occaision as they have failed to provide you with the information to which you are entitled.

We will therefore be writing to London Scottish Bank Plc with the details of this complaint. We will ask them to ensure that they provide you with the information that you requested as a matter of priority. Furthermore we will ask them to take any steps necessary to ensure their further complience with the Data Protection Act.

What happens next?

We would now recommend that you contact the FOS if you wish to begin the process of reclaiming any unfair penalty charges. If when we contact London Scottish Bank Plc there is any doubt that they received the SAR you sent to them we may need to contact you again.

However in most cases & certainly where you have been able to provide us with proof of postage or receipt for your request (which I have provided), we would not expect to need to contact you again & you should await the receipt of the information to which you are entitled from London Scottish Bank Plc in due course.(I've been waiting for SAR data since September; how much due course do they want?)

 

If you require any further clarification please call our Helpline

Yours Sincerely

Charlotte Ashworth

Customer Service Officer

 

I'm not expecting London Scottish to be able to come up with any further SAR than what Robinson Way sent me (that dated from Oct 05; over a year after the default by London Scottish) & I'm pleased that I've had a response (albeit a lame one) from the Information Commissioners Office as I feel that this will show the court that I have exhausted all other avenues to resolve the default issue before bringing it to court.

I'm not going to waste any more time waiting for London Scottish to send me anything as

a) I'm pretty sure they haven't got anything

b) It'll take me a while to do my court forms with POC's etc so I might as well make a start on them

 

Time to do some more reading methinks... Have read a lot in defaults/ legal but cant seem to find successes against London Scottish/ next directory re default removal

 

I'm doing so much reading on CAG forums that I'm considering claiming for eye strain in my damages!

[car2403]

Not a Default Removal, but Moonhawk's Next thread is interesting nonetheless...

 

Oh, I've had 3 of these ICO letters in the last few weeks - it is a standard reply, as I didn't mention penalty charges neither!

[nocredit]

I'll take a look at that thread thanks

its a p*** take that the ICO can fob people off with replies like that!