Lloyds TSB and Data Protection

eskbanker

If the data resulting from that clearly demonstrates that they know how to contact your dad but failed to use the correct address, then I'd have thought the next step is to put your allegations to them in the form of a complaint, so they get the chance to make amends.

If on the other hand there is still more information you want from them to assist in deciding how to proceed then you can submit another SAR.

jayu619

eskbanker wrote: »

If the data resulting from that clearly demonstrates that they know how to contact your dad but failed to use the correct address, then I'd have thought the next step is to put your allegations to them in the form of a complaint, so they get the chance to make amends.

If on the other hand there is still more information you want from them to assist in deciding how to proceed then you can submit another SAR.

I will check their SAR pack that I received recently and study it again, because I feel like they have not given all the info I had asked.

I will post back around 10/11pm as I am heading out to dinner shortly.

Jay

jayu619

Hello,

I am looking at Judge & Priestly solicitors SAR response.

One of the things I had asked for in the SAR request was:
- Correspondence/email between Judge and Priestly and THH, Leasehold Services team.

J&P responded with the following:
"Correspondence between J&P and our client (THH) has not been included as it is exempt from the right of subject access because it is in contemplation or in process of legal proceedings and therefore consists of information for which legal professional privilege is claimed".

Are they referring to THH's legal proceedings or possible legal proceedings from my dad? I think its to do with the former, but the legal proceedings had come to an end; the CCJ removal was dated 14/3/18 and set aside awarded 28/3/18, and their SAR pack came through to my dad on the 3/4/18.

Also, not sure how much of a big deal this is, but on original copy of claim form for CCJ, the person who signed it was a member of J&P's team. On the claim for where the claimant signs, it says 'Claimant's legal representative', yet on the particulars of claim, under statement of truth, the same person signs it but she is a Trainee Account Manager, not a legal representative/solicitor for Claimant. Is that allowed? Again, no expert in the law field, just something I had noticed.

On their draft order to remove the CCJ, the evidence J&P relied on (statement of truth), said the following:
"The C corresponded with the D. Due to no response from D, a claim was issued on the 15th May 2017 and Judgement entered 14th June 2017. It has been since been brought to the C's attention that the correspondence address used to issue a claim was incorrect. The D had notified the C of a change of address, however, due to an administrative error, the address was not changed on the system".
From my point of view, it sounds like J&P have nothing to do with the mistake, and that it is the council who have given the wrong address to solicitors. Furthermore, my dad did not notify them with a sudden and recent change of address because, council knew which was rental property address and which one was correspondence address. The statement f truth, yet was signed by the same person as an account manager and applicant's solicitor.

In light of the above, should I send another SAR to solicitors asking for correspondence between THH and J&P regarding my dads file/rental proeprty, specifically wanting to know if the council sent the solicitors correct address. And when it came to setting aside judgement, what did the council send them to rectify address?

Sorry for the long message. Any help would be great.
Thanks,

Jay

Emily_Joy

eskbanker wrote: »

One is that they used CASS to do so, which wouldn't necessarily involve consent from (or even notification to) your dad and I believe could be handled seamlessly between banks...

Please correct me if I am wrong, but last time I checked CASS guarantee it said that any incoming payments to old account would have been forwarded automatically for 3 years and it has been less than 3 years since the change took place.

eskbanker

jayu619 wrote: »

I am looking at Judge & Priestly solicitors SAR response.

One of the things I had asked for in the SAR request was:
- Correspondence/email between Judge and Priestly and THH, Leasehold Services team.

J&P responded with the following:
"Correspondence between J&P and our client (THH) has not been included as it is exempt from the right of subject access because it is in contemplation or in process of legal proceedings and therefore consists of information for which legal professional privilege is claimed".

Are they referring to THH's legal proceedings or possible legal proceedings from my dad? I think its to do with the former, but the legal proceedings had come to an end; the CCJ removal was dated 14/3/18 and set aside awarded 28/3/18, and their SAR pack came through to my dad on the 3/4/18.

[...]

In light of the above, should I send another SAR to solicitors asking for correspondence between THH and J&P regarding my dads file/rental proeprty, specifically wanting to know if the council sent the solicitors correct address. And when it came to setting aside judgement, what did the council send them to rectify address?

I could be wrong but don't believe that legal professional privilege ceases once proceedings have been completed, i.e. if they claimed LPP before they'd still be entitled to do so now.

I suspect that you may struggle to get to the bottom of whether the council definitely informed the solicitors of the correct address, as both parties could claim the same legal privilege regarding correspondence between them and frustrate your attempt to establish which was (more) culpable, but ultimately it's the council's responsibility to ensure that a CCJ is served correctly, even if their 'subcontractor' made a mess of it.

However, I think this is getting to the point where you need specialist expertise rather than (well-intentioned!) speculation from random strangers on the internet. You mentioned a family friend who's a solicitor, or perhaps Citizen's Advice?

eskbanker

Emily_Joy wrote: »

Please correct me if I am wrong, but last time I checked CASS guarantee it said that any incoming payments to old account would have been forwarded automatically for 3 years and it has been less than 3 years since the change took place.

Indeed, but the new bank will still advise banks sending money to the old account, requesting that they update details, so the issue is whether or not the sending customer is made aware by the sending bank in these circumstances.

jayu619

eskbanker wrote: »

I could be wrong but don't believe that legal professional privilege ceases once proceedings have been completed, i.e. if they claimed LPP before they'd still be entitled to do so now.

I suspect that you may struggle to get to the bottom of whether the council definitely informed the solicitors of the correct address, as both parties could claim the same legal privilege regarding correspondence between them and frustrate your attempt to establish which was (more) culpable, but ultimately it's the council's responsibility to ensure that a CCJ is served correctly, even if their 'subcontractor' made a mess of it.

However, I think this is getting to the point where you need specialist expertise rather than (well-intentioned!) speculation from random strangers on the internet. You mentioned a family friend who's a solicitor, or perhaps Citizen's Advice?

Thanks EB.
I am going to send them an SAR and see what that brings about. My only thinking is that, I will be asking for any files mentioning/referencing my dads name/property, which should include the proceedings between the council and solicitors. If they don't provide this and pleased LPP, do you think I can complain to ICO about this? I do not see how this will affect the case. In my head, I am thinking, should I go about suing them, surely we can ask for this to be produced in court? Or have I been watching too much TV? Joking aside, I think it will be difficult to get the info I need from J&P and/or council.

My friend is usually in the family/commercial/house type law, not sure about this stuff. I can definitely ask him. Would CAB prove to be helpful? I've never used them...

eskbanker

jayu619 wrote: »

Thanks EB.
I am going to send them an SAR and see what that brings about. My only thinking is that, I will be asking for any files mentioning/referencing my dads name/property, which should include the proceedings between the council and solicitors. If they don't provide this and pleased LPP, do you think I can complain to ICO about this? I do not see how this will affect the case. In my head, I am thinking, should I go about suing them, surely we can ask for this to be produced in court? Or have I been watching too much TV? Joking aside, I think it will be difficult to get the info I need from J&P and/or council.

My friend is usually in the family/commercial/house type law, not sure about this stuff. I can definitely ask him. Would CAB prove to be helpful? I've never used them...

My understanding is that LPP data (such as that between client and solicitor) is not only exempted from SAR disclosure but also from legal proceedings themselves, so if it's legit for this data to be protected then they won't release it in response to any number of SARs, the ICO won't object (as this is compliant with DPA) and even if you went as far as suing then such correspondence would still be protected from disclosure in court.

I don't know if CAB would be any use, I wasn't speaking from experience, but I suspect that you'd need to engage and pay for proper legal advice anyway if you were seriously contemplating suing solicitors as they'd run rings round you otherwise. It might be different if there was clear verifiable evidence of negligence but it doesn't sound particularly likely that you'll achieve that....

Perhaps time to formally complain to the solicitors though, i.e. "your failure to use the correct address resulted in x, y, z consequences, how do you propose to make things right?".

jayu619

OK thanks EB. I appreciate your opinion and comments.
If its going to be a hassle, then I won't pursue the legal claim. I just thought, if I brought an action against them, they could well settle out of court. I say that because, after I found out that they had not rectified the correspondence address of where legal docs should go to, I emailed THH and J&P in same email bringing it to their attention. This was 3 weeks ago. Still no reply. I threatened them that I will be looking into court action... It just confirms that they know they F'd up. Do you know what I mean?

eskbanker

jayu619 wrote: »

OK thanks EB. I appreciate your opinion and comments.
If its going to be a hassle, then I won't pursue the legal claim. I just thought, if I brought an action against them, they could well settle out of court. I say that because, after I found out that they had not rectified the correspondence address of where legal docs should go to, I emailed THH and J&P in same email bringing it to their attention. This was 3 weeks ago. Still no reply. I threatened them that I will be looking into court action... It just confirms that they know they F'd up. Do you know what I mean?

Of all the people to threaten with court action, I think solicitors are the least likely to find that intimidating in any way! Personally I wouldn't read anything significant into a lack of response after three weeks and certainly don't assume that it means they know they're on the back foot.

They may well settle out of court but first you have to establish a clear case against them, with documentary evidence of who knew what and when, and put it to them for their response. When you say you "found out that they had not rectified the correspondence address of where legal docs should go to", exactly how did you find out and is this indisputable fact?