Lloyds TSB and Data Protection

jayu619

eskbanker wrote: »

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?

Hahaha, this is true. I take that back.
In answer to your question, I had the pleasure of phoning CCBC in Northampton on 1st May, when I had not heard anything back since early April about set aside. The lady on the phone confirmed that they received draft order on 14/3 and judgement set aside on 28/3. And I said, its strange I have not received any confirmation, so I asked her out of curiosity, where the docs were being sent to. She confirmed it was going to my dads rental property, and not to his correspondence address. I have this recorded on my iPhone as I'd recorded this call in question. And also, they keep a track of when and who calls in regarding a case.

Emily_Joy

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?

Whilst it may be the council, its solicitors, or the banks who made the mistake it is reasonable to ask "what actions did your Dad take in order to minimize the consequences?" It is not a good idea to do nothing in hope to get a larger compensation.

1. When did your Dad notice the corresponding address issue for the first time?
2. Did he put mail redirection upon discovery of the problem?
3. Did the tenants advise your Dad that there is mail for him?
4. Did the tenants returned the mail to the council?
5. How often did your Dad check CRA files?

I am guessing Lloyds offered £500 partly because this is FOS charge.

FrugalShaz

There is clearly fault by both the bank and the council. Firstly the council, not sending a statement confirming payments etc and furthermore receiving no correspondence for non-payment. This in hand would have flagged up the error at the bank. As I used to work for a bank, my only thought would have been that they changed/updated systems which didn't transfer the reference number over because the reference number was not inputted correctly for the new system to recognise. This could be seen as human error unfortunately.

Has the council offered an explanation as to the lack of correspondence to the issue of non-payments and sent copy letters before, I take it they have removed the CCJ from your Dad's credit file?

eskbanker

jayu619 wrote: »

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?

Mulling this over again this morning, I think it does seem reasonable to press the solicitors for further details about their management of your father's personal data when within their control. In particular, I'd have thought that he's entitled to know about the vague 'administrative error' that resulted in the wrong address being used, so I'd suggest asking them very specifically about exactly what information they received about your father's addresses and when, and how they handled that data. They are obliged under DPA (fourth principle) to keep personal data accurate and up to date.

The request would obviously need to be phrased in such a way as to avoid them being able to hide behind legal privilege, so even though they can (and presumably will) claim LPP for the correspondence between the council and themselves, they should be able and willing to disclose the specific information about when addresses were sent from the council and how/when they were subsequently updated on J&P's systems and used for correspondence. They can always use redaction if necessary....

In an earlier post you stated that the council had admitted by email that they'd advised J&P of your dad's correspondence address, did you refer to this in your more recent email to both parties? Do you know exactly when they did so - it seems critical to me that you establish that this was before the CCJ proceedings started?

jayu619

Emily_Joy wrote: »

1. When did your Dad notice the corresponding address issue for the first time?
2. Did he put mail redirection upon discovery of the problem?
3. Did the tenants advise your Dad that there is mail for him?
4. Did the tenants returned the mail to the council?
5. How often did your Dad check CRA files?

I am guessing Lloyds offered £500 partly because this is FOS charge.

Hi Emily,

If I am reading correctly, here are the answers to your questions:

1. Dad found out in January 2018, early part before we were going to submit mortgage application.
2. No mail redirection needed, because all letters destined for rental property, know to send it to correspondence address. In a different borough.
3. Tenants did not advise dad; I don't think they need to since all mails should be sent to correspondence address.
4. Tenants did not send the letters to council.
5. Dad checked his record, first time in 2 years.

I hope that answers your questions.


Thanks,
Jay

jayu619

FrugalShaz wrote: »

There is clearly fault by both the bank and the council. Firstly the council, not sending a statement confirming payments etc and furthermore receiving no correspondence for non-payment. This in hand would have flagged up the error at the bank. As I used to work for a bank, my only thought would have been that they changed/updated systems which didn't transfer the reference number over because the reference number was not inputted correctly for the new system to recognise. This could be seen as human error unfortunately.

Will that be the same for my dads situation because Lloyds claim the original SO set up in 2011 was cancelled and a new one setup. Or are you suggesting if and when Lloyds updated their systems, it deleted old SO and set up a new one without reference?

FrugalShaz wrote: »

Has the council offered an explanation as to the lack of correspondence to the issue of non-payments and sent copy letters before, I take it they have removed the CCJ from your Dad's credit file?

No explanation from council regarding lack of correspondence. I have asked this on new SAR. And correct, they removed the CCJ at the cost of solicitors because according to council, they provided J&P with correspondence address. But in Solicitors statement of truth for draft order to remove CCJ, it seems like the council were the ones who provided J&P with incorrect address.

I am awaiting for SARs from council, FoS, J&P and Lloyds. Once I get them back in 30 days, I will know more.

bundoran

jayu619 wrote: »

On a separate note, I wanted to ask about the possibility of suing council solicitors directly for their incompetence, in making the same mistake twice as well as lying on their statement of truth when sending their draft order.

I should probably start a new thread, but unsure of which heading to start that under...any advice would be much appreciated.

Jay

I read that you've taken back the suggestion of suing the council solicitors for incompetence, but I don't think you could anyway.

if they're a private firm acting for the council, or if they're in-house employees and so have a de facto client relationship with the council, then their client is the council and you (or your father) don't have any contractual relationship with them, as you're not their client.

You could potentially complain to their regualtory body that their conduct is unbefitting a solicitor or that their alleged incompetence has brought the profession into disrepute, but I doubt you'd get any money.

In any event you seem to have enough going on already without starting on another front, so I think that taking back the suggestion is a good call.

jayu619

eskbanker wrote: »

In particular, I'd have thought that he's entitled to know about the vague 'administrative error' that resulted in the wrong address being used, so I'd suggest asking them very specifically about exactly what information they received about your father's addresses and when, and how they handled that data. They are obliged under DPA (fourth principle) to keep personal data accurate and up to date.

This is what I had sent to J&P last night, let me know if I should change/add/delete anything? I think it covers everything we need:

Please supply me with all documents relating to me by name and/or reference, relating to case: MAL/TOWE010/1470. Please could you therefore supply me with the relevant documents such as emails between THH abd J&P, postal letters and most importantly, telephone calls between THH and J&P. I would specifically like to find out confirmations of my correspondence address being passed on to you, if at all during early stages of CCJ proceedings. Also, when the CCJ was being set aside, was there a confirmation of correspondence address?[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

Please note that I require disclosure of any personal data which you hold on me between April 2017 and April 2018

eskbanker wrote: »

The request would obviously need to be phrased in such a way as to avoid them being able to hide behind legal privilege, so even though they can (and presumably will) claim LPP for the correspondence between the council and themselves, they should be able and willing to disclose the specific information about when addresses were sent from the council and how/when they were subsequently updated on J&P's systems and used for correspondence. They can always use redaction if necessary....

The only thing I did not mention was principle 4 under DPA that they have a responsibility in keeping data up to date.

eskbanker wrote: »

In an earlier post you stated that the council had admitted by email that they'd advised J&P of your dad's correspondence address, did you refer to this in your more recent email to both parties?

Yes I did. Even mentioned why they didn't learn from their first mistake...

eskbanker wrote: »

Do you know exactly when they did so - it seems critical to me that you establish that this was before the CCJ proceedings started?

And it was the first few emails between THH and my dad, that the collections officer admitted a wrong address was used. All in email and writing.

eskbanker

jayu619 wrote: »

This is what I had sent to J&P last night, let me know if I should change/add/delete anything? I think it covers everything we need:

Please supply me with all documents relating to me by name and/or reference, relating to case: MAL/TOWE010/1470. Please could you therefore supply me with the relevant documents such as emails between THH abd J&P, postal letters and most importantly, telephone calls between THH and J&P. I would specifically like to find out confirmations of my correspondence address being passed on to you, if at all during early stages of CCJ proceedings. Also, when the CCJ was being set aside, was there a confirmation of correspondence address?[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

Please note that I require disclosure of any personal data which you hold on me between April 2017 and April 2018

If it was me, I'd have focused specifically on the personal data management aspect (rather than documents, emails, phone calls), to try to home in specifically on when they were advised of the correct correspondence address. By asking for much more than this, there's a risk (IMHO) that they'll simply hide behind LPP again.

I believe that what you're trying to establish is that they knew your dad's correspondence address all along but negligently failed to use it when initiating the CCJ proceedings, thereby setting in train the chain of events in which he lost out on a property purchase, suffered stress, etc, so, tempting though it is to ask them for everything, I think it pays to be more focused sometimes.

Having said that, it may have been worth explicitly asking for detail of the administrative error they previously referred to, i.e. who made it, when, etc.

jayu619 wrote: »

The only thing I did not mention was principle 4 under DPA that they have a responsibility in keeping data up to date.

I don't see this as important at this stage while you're trying to extract data from them but should be referenced when you complain to them.

jayu619 wrote: »

Yes I did. Even mentioned why they didn't learn from their first mistake...

Returning to the theme of focus, I'm unconvinced that there's much value in making too much out of subsequent mistakes - it's their first mistake (in 2017) that caused all the pain and grief, the second one is almost incidental as I understand it, so if you're pitching for some sort of redress, it's the first one that matters.

jayu619 wrote: »

And it was the first few emails between THH and my dad, that the collections officer admitted a wrong address was used. All in email and writing.

That wasn't quite what I was asking, which was do you have evidence of exactly when the council advised J&P of the correct correspondence address?

jayu619

Hi EB,

Understood what you are saying.
I would like to send the following as a revised GDPR request:
Please supply me with all documents relating to me by name and/or reference, relating to case: MAL/TOWE010/1470. Please could you supply me with the relevant documents relating to my correspondence. This should include but not limited to, the request correspondence in whichever form it may have been done so, from THH confirming my correspondence address before CCJ proceedings took place around or after March 2017. And also, correspondence from the council to J&P (if any), when the issue of wrong address was brought up by me, post draft order being sent to remove CCJ.[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

Please note that I require disclosure of the above information of any personal data which you hold on me between April 2017 and April 2018.

Is that OK?
Also, I don't have to send a letter right, I can just send an email asking for this under new GDPR rules?

And regarding the last point - I do not have anything that was said to me by the council advising J&P about the correct address. I am hoping the recent SAR requests to the council will reveal what you are asking for.

Right now, all I have close to that is, collections officer Emmanuel during his first initial emails when CCJ came to light was that he solicitors made an error in using rental property address. And then, when the CCJ was in the process of getting removed, I had emailed Emmanuel telling him of my concerns that I had not received any court documents from CCBC (on May 1st or around then) regarding the set aside. He forwarded my request to solicitors. Emmanuel then forwarded me their response, which did not answer the question I had - instead, solicitors answered that 'yes, we are going to send his SAR documents to the correspondence address he had on the letter'. At that point, I think solicitors thought I had asked about the SAR request being sent ot correspondence address and not official court documents.

Jay