Can someone help me please

di3004

KPR11 wrote: »

Hi Di,

As always, thanks for your reply! Just a few observations from what you said

Not a problem

The letter seems to address just the loan documentatiion issue and has no mention whatsoever about other accounts I hold with them. In fact the Subject of their reply is: Data Protection Act 1998 - KPR11 - Loan Documentation.

I would give the ICO a ring on this to be honest, they are more up on these matters and are giving advice on the best action to take, but I do see your point here.


Loan was repaid early last year. The loan was originally due to run from 30/03/2008 to 30/03/2011.


Hmmm, they should therefore in my opinion - if this was repaid only last year still hold this agreement. I will ask my mate about this one and get back to you or ask him to post up for you either later or tomorrow for you.

I have already made the claim, I wonder if that is what confused them as I posted the claim and SARs separately but on the same day.

Thanks for your help

Yes, its possible, but still, best to make sure just in case they are trying to pull a fast one.;)

I will get my mate to check this out for you okay?
I'm sure he will either be here at some point tonight but for definate tomorrow sometime, if you don'd mind that is?

Its my pleasure. X

KPR11

di3004 wrote: »

Yes, its possible, but still, best to make sure just in case they are trying to pull a fast one.;)

I will get my mate to check this out for you okay?
I'm sure he will either be here at some point tonight but for definate tomorrow sometime, if you don'd mind that is?

Its my pleasure. X

Of course I don't, if he wou;dn't mind that is!? I am always grateful for all the help I get!

I got a feeling that they might be trying to pull a fast one so posted the full reply on here to see if that is what others thought as well.

Thanks!

di3004

KPR11 wrote: »

Of course I don't, if he wou;dn't mind that is!? I am always grateful for all the help I get!

I got a feeling that they might be trying to pull a fast one so posted the full reply on here to see if that is what others thought as well.

Thanks!

LOL cool :T, well I have just this minute left him a PM and I have left him with the details.;)
I'm sure he will have the answers for you as soon as he's here.;)

I must agree with you and we lose trust in these banks, its good to always double check on things I think.:)

never-in-doubt

Hi Di / KPR

In response to your PM Di, and reading the thread it seems Natwest are already in direct breach of s.7 (DPA1998) and so you should now formally complain to the ICO and let them take matters further for you, click here: http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/data_protection.aspx

Regards to the actual SAR documents, yes you're both right in that the loan agreement and any other documents, including emails and internal memo's about you, should be sent - it pretty much covers everything. I note you specifically used a SAR Template which lists what data you require, however the lenders ignore this (usually) because quite simply a SAR is, as you rightly point out, a request for ALL information that the organisation holds about you - they CANNOT cherrypick the data they send.

Ergo, you really need to take this up with the ICO, in the meantime send the letter below to Natpest and include a copy to your ICO complaint - regardless of whether they do now comply, you still need to get your complaint in so that the ICO have a record of said complaint.

Dear Sirs,

Account No: XXXXXXXX

Subject Access Request - S.7 Data Protection Act 1998

I write with reference to previous correspondence and in particular my SAR under s.7 DPA(1998) which remains outstanding.

With reference to your recent letter dated xx/xx/2010, i'd like to query the accuracy of your response because it appears you are confusing my actual s.7 DPA(1998) request against a s.78 CCA(1974) request.

You state in your letter, and I quote;

"Further to your request for information regarding your NatWest loans I confirm that, on this occassion, I am unable to provide a copy of the loan agreement for the account number and sort code"

However you are mistaken, in that a Subject Access request under s.7 of the Data Protection Act is clear in what should and should not be sent - nowhere does it state that you should relate to account specific material - it in fact relates to all material and data that you hold about me for all and any previous accounts held with you. You cannot cherrypick accounts, then rebuff my request with some excuse about not having to provide an agreement. Yes, had I put in a s.78 (CCA1974) request you'd be quite right in refusing to send a copy of the loan agreement, as s.78 does not allow provision for settled accounts however I did make it quite clear, from outset, that I was requesting all information held about me under the Data Protection Act which does, unfortunately for Natwest, include a copy of the original credit agreement.

I do not think this was a difficult request, nor do I think you realise the mistake you've made and therefore feel I have no option but to report your shortcomings to the relevant authorities. Regardless of my official complaint, I hereby formally demand that you now act in accordance with the Data Commissioner and supply all documentation that you hold about me including, specifically, the loan agreement in question.

Again, please supply me with a copy of all information Natwest Bank hold about me including a list of all accounts and details of payments along with copies of statements. If you continually refuse to send a copy of my agreement I shall have to consider legal action to obtain sight of said document, which may result in a CPR:31.16 demand which leaves you no choice but to comply.

Under the Data Protection Act 1984 and 1998, and including the right of subject access under these acts, I hereby request that you supply me with any and all historical data in your possession which relates to me and am entitled to under section 7(1) of the Act. If you store any of the older records on microfiche, please be aware that the Information Commissioner deems this to be a relevant filing system under the Act. As such, any microfiche data must be sent to me in fully legible and comprehensible form.

Additionally, where there has been any event in my account history over this period which has 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 business with you.

If you are unable to supply this data because there has been no such manual intervention, then please be so kind as to confirm this in your response. I re-enclose the statutory maximum fee of £10. Furthermore, if I discover that you have levied disproportionate penalties against me or collected monies to which you were not entitled, then I shall be reclaiming them and also the enclosed £10 Data Protection Act subject access request fee.

Your 40 day deadline to supply this information to me is continual from the date of original request and you are therefore also in breach of this, as noted in my complaint to the ICO.

Yours faithfully




Sign

never-in-doubt

p.s. you do not add an account number to the letter - they trace you by name and address - the fact you put an account number within your request may have confused them - bless, thick idiots!!

Best of Luck.

di3004

Brilliant, thank you Niddy.:T

I knew you would have the right answers.:beer:

KPR11

never-in-doubt wrote: »

Hi Di / KPR

In response to your PM Di, and reading the thread it seems Natwest are already in direct breach of s.7 (DPA1998) and so you should now formally complain to the ICO and let them take matters further for you, click here: http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/data_protection.aspx

Regards to the actual SAR documents, yes you're both right in that the loan agreement and any other documents, including emails and internal memo's about you, should be sent - it pretty much covers everything. I note you specifically used a SAR Template which lists what data you require, however the lenders ignore this (usually) because quite simply a SAR is, as you rightly point out, a request for ALL information that the organisation holds about you - they CANNOT cherrypick the data they send.

Ergo, you really need to take this up with the ICO, in the meantime send the letter below to Natpest and include a copy to your ICO complaint - regardless of whether they do now comply, you still need to get your complaint in so that the ICO have a record of said complaint.

Hello mate,

Long time! I had a funny feeling Di was going to be contacting you, I should have known better! Is there anywhere on MSE forums that Niddy doesn't have a presence?

Quick one, is the follow up letter going to screw up my PPI claim and/or my relationship with the Bank? Not that it really matters considering I am going to make a Bank charges claim once I have some clarity on PPI and know the result of the GLC case :rotfl::rotfl:

Thanks

KPR11

never-in-doubt wrote: »

p.s. you do not add an account number to the letter - they trace you by name and address - the fact you put an account number within your request may have confused them - bless, thick idiots!!

Best of Luck.

Will make sure I don't add an account number this time. I did think that the account number together with the fact the PPI claim being submitted may have confused them.

I don't think they have breached the 40 day deadline as the request was only made 3 weeks ago.

never-in-doubt

KPR11 wrote: »

Hello mate,

Long time! I had a funny feeling Di was going to be contacting you, I should have known better! Is there anywhere on MSE forums that Niddy doesn't have a presence?

Quick one, is the follow up letter going to screw up my PPI claim and/or my relationship with the Bank? Not that it really matters considering I am going to make a Bank charges claim once I have some clarity on PPI and know the result of the GLC case :rotfl::rotfl:

Thanks

Hiya

Yea wondered if you'd remember that we've spoken before :rotfl:

The letter will get you what you want, it will not screw anything up, don't worry. They just needed reminded of their obligations and the law...

never-in-doubt

KPR11 wrote: »

Will make sure I don't add an account number this time. I did think that the account number together with the fact the PPI claim being submitted may have confused them.

I don't think they have breached the 40 day deadline as the request was only made 3 weeks ago.

That's my original thought - that they are slightly confused, bless! :mad:

They will breach it though, ergo doesn't cause much of an issue whether you mention it or not......