RBS - DPA Breach!

youthnovels

YorkshireBoy wrote: »

I would imagine RBS's defence will lie in the very first sentence of that section, namely "knowingly and recklessly".

Still, lets wait and see how the OP gets on.

"knowingly or recklessly".

Now if we move to the Oxford dictionary at this point ...

Pronunciation:/ˈrɛklɪs/
adjective
heedless of danger or the consequences of one's actions; rash or impetuous:
you mustn't be so reckless
reckless driving

Now I would say, working in an environment where you deal with clients sensitive data it is indeed reckless to disclose information without first of all confirming the identity of the person whom you are speaking too.

zppp

youthnovels wrote: »

Forget it. I thought this place was supposed to help. If you don't agree with what I'm doing, respond, make your point, leave it at that. I have never been on a forum that has jumped down someones throat so quickly.

So what was it you wanted to know exactly. You have been told there is no breach of the DPA. And?

youthnovels wrote: »

And we all know that a "goodwill gesture" generally speaking covers up something, when the customer has a right to complain but hasn't experienced any loss as such. In layman's terms they've slightly messed up.

At the end of the day, their trainees obviously aren't being briefed on the importance of DPA. End of.

Oh get a grip. They will have been trained on the DPA. The point is they made a mistake. Get over it.

YorkshireBoy

youthnovels wrote: »

snip

Like I said earlier, you're going about it all the wrong way.

It's quite simple really. The bank has a complaints procedure, so use it. Write to them setting out all your concerns/grievances clearly and concisely (lose the emotion and stifle the desire to [let them know you want to] take them to the cleaners).

Wait your 8 weeks (do something else more enjoyable), then refer the matter to the FOS...and ICO if you so wish (but you'll get a better response from the FOS I can assure you).


EDIT: Have I typed this post correctly?

zppp

youthnovels wrote: »

"knowingly or recklessly".

Now if we move to the Oxford dictionary at this point ...



Now I would say, working in an environment where you deal with clients sensitive data it is indeed reckless to disclose information without first of all confirming that the person who you are speaking too.

Still posting, even though you have removed your initial post? :rotfl:

Forget it. :rotfl:

youthnovels

zppp wrote: »

Still posting, even though you have removed your initial post? :rotfl:

Forget it. :rotfl:

Love it how people ignore the valid points I make.

Wait your 8 weeks (do something else more enjoyable), then refer the matter to the FOS...and ICO if you so wish (but you'll get a better response from the FOS I can assure you).

So people slate me about their taxes blah blah blah but they're happy for me to take it to the FOS knowing full well it was cost RBS a £500 referral fee which is blatantly more than they'll offer me in compensation?

zppp

youthnovels wrote: »

Love it how people ignore the valid points I make.

No, you think you have made a valid point. When in fact you haven't. I could tell by the tone of your first reply that you were simply argumentative so, go on, continue.

opinions4u

youthnovels wrote: »

So people slate me about their taxes blah blah blah but they're happy for me to take it to the FOS knowing full well it was cost RBS a £500 referral fee which is blatantly more than they'll offer me in compensation?

I made the comment about taxes.

Another poster made the point about the FOS.

I was making a point about how much I think your complaint should be worth. The other poster was explaining to you a method of how to maximise your return by playing the system.

If you are unable to differentiate between different users with different names on an internet forum there is little hope for you.

YorkshireBoy

youthnovels wrote: »

...take it to the FOS knowing full well it was cost RBS a £500 referral fee which is blatantly more than they'll offer me in compensation?

They'll only be charged the £500 case fee if the complaint is investigated by a senior adjudicator...and many aren't passed that far up the FOS foodchain...and if yours is, you could be waiting 8 months for an outcome (if recent posts on these boards are anything to go by).

I agree though, that RBS will incur costs (in time etc), which they may consider when they receive your clear and concise complaint.

YorkshireBoy

opinions4u wrote: »

The other poster was explaining to you a method of how to maximise your return by playing the system.

Moi? Never!

youthnovels

YorkshireBoy wrote: »

They'll only be charged the £500 case fee if the complaint is investigated by a senior adjudicator...and many aren't passed that far up the FOS foodchain.

I agree though, that RBS will incur costs (in time etc), which they may consider when they receive your clear and concise complaint.

My understanding is that it is a £500 fee if if it is the third referral made to the FOS against the company in that year. I could be wrong in that though.

I have actually wrote a letter of complaint which if required I am more than happy to post on here. I handed the letter in by hand though (I walk past the branch in question twice a day on my way to and from work) which was subsequently handed to the branch manager there and then who opened, read and immediately took me into her office.