Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

[Desyduk]

Re: Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

Buchanan Clark & Wells refund £10 Subject Access request Fee.

[Desyduk]

Re: Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

I've sought clarification from CISAS any ideas how to handle this?

[Desyduk]

Re: Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

Today I received the CISAS Adjudicator's Decision see it attached.

The main points are:

1. Our evidence was compelling.

2. T-mobile failed to process our cancellation request and the alleged debt of £1092.43 is to be waived.


3. T-mobile and Buchanan Clark & Wells failed in their duty of care to our youngster and effectively harrassed her for which she is to be compensated in the sum of £450.

4. And this is the bit I don't understand and will ask your advice in my next post.

The Adjudicator thinks it fair that our youngster should pay T-mobile the "nominal" sum of £210.00 based on 6 months service charges at £35.00 per month in lieu
of her failure to mitigate the losses incurred as a result of the company’s error. In other words although she's dyslexic and independant minded she should have spotted T-mobiles failure to cancel the contract by seeing their charges on her bank account earlier, even though they shouldn't have charged her at all?

[Desyduk]

Re: Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

The Information Commissioners Complaint

FROM: desyduk@allaboutdebt.com

TO: casework@ico.gsi.gov.uk

Addition to the complaint submitted on 26 July 2012 by Desyduk

Friday, 7 September 2012, 12:42

Dear Casework,


Further to the complaint submitted to you on 26 July 2012, please find attached a copy of my letter dated 7 September 2012 to the Data Controller at Everything Everywhere Ltd concerning their non-compliance with my Subject Access Request dated 28 June 2012, T-mobile (Everything Everywhere Ltd.) have not supplied all the data they hold about Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx within the statutory time-frame, they have sent only limited partial data and I wrote telling them this on 24 July last. They have not responded.


As a result of their lack of response to my follow up request for all the data I now wish to add their non-compliance with the SAR to the original complaint, which I said may happen in the original complaint, and ask you to deal with obtaining all the missing data from them, some of which I have detailed in my correspondence to them of 24 July 2012 and is included with the attachment.


I spoke on the phone with your office this week and I understand our complaint has yet to be handled but is in the queue. Whilst on the phone you have asked me to provide you with Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx's written authority to act for her and on her behalf. Xxxxxxxx is on holiday until next week and I shall ask her to email you with this authority on her return.


Yours faithfully,




Desyduk
For and on behalf of
Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxxxx

[Desyduk]

Re: Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

Our Final Response to Everything Everwhere Ltd (T-mobile) for full compliance with our SAR.

RECORDED DELIVERY

7 september 2012 Newcastle Upon Tyne

The Data Controller
Everything Everywhere Limited
Hatfield Business Park
Hatfield
Hertfordshire
AL10 9BW

Dear Sir/Madam,

Everything Everywhere Ltd ref: 3456789 and

Buchanan Clark & Wells ref: B123456, BCW House, 24 George Square, Glasgow G2 1EG

Subject Access Request - S.7 Data Protection Act 1998

On 24 July 2012, for a second time, I wrote and requested that you supply me a copy of all information that you hold about Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, this has not as yet been responded to, in accordance with the provisions set within s.7 Data Protection Act 1998. Therefore, this is now my final response in the matter, I'll now refer this to the Information Commissioner to deal with.

I clearly explained in my original letter dated 28 June 2012 what I expected from you, therefore your lack of diligence in dealing with my request has left me no alternative but to inform the Information Commissioner of this, and leave them to instruct you to deal with my request.

In addition the statutory maximum fee of £10.00 for this Subject Access Request, which Buchanan Clark & Wells received from me on 14 June 2012, to access data about Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, which they remitted to you at your behest, was then misused by you to offset against a disputed alleged debt. I have previously submitted a complaint to the Information Commissioners to deal with this as your colleagues failed to address this matter too, see the attached email extract to your Helen X Young. If you now provide the data, as requested, then I do expect as a gesture of goodwill for you to refund the fee paid to Buchanan Clark & Wells being you have already broken the terms of the Act in refusing to deal with my simple request within the allocated timeframe given by the authority.


I also attach a copy of my original request and a copy of my subsequent correspondence requesting all the outstanding data.

I do, expect the main actions to be dealt with, as matter of course, and look forward to hearing from you in due course.
Yours faithfully,

Desyduk
For and on behalf of
Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx

[Desyduk]

Re: Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

...And this is the advice I gave to CISAS by return...

Re: 2121212 Xxxxxxx v Everything Everywhere (T-Mobile (UK) Limited) 3

FROM: desyduk@allaboutdebt.com
TO: CISAS

Friday, 3 August 2012, 14:02

Dear Mr Gates,

Thank you for your email today, it appears the company are now intending not to settle the claim in full and thereby breach your scheme rules. You must take action with the company to ensure they abide by your scheme rules.

Attached is a copy of our claim submitted to you 28 June 2012, your acknowledgement of the claim of the same date and your letter dated 11 July 2012 confirming the company are settling the claim in full.

You will note that our claim is clearly for £1100, an apology, an explanation, the company's claim to be written off and the action required of the company to change it's culture.

According to the rules of the scheme which are binding upon the company, they were required to submit to CISAS, on or before 12 July 2012, their response including any matters within the claim which they may dispute. In your letter to us of 11 July 2012, you did not mention that the company dispute any element of the claim, to the contrary, you confirmed the company are settling our claim in full.

As the timescale for the company to dispute the claim with CISAS has elapsed I cannot comment on the details of their latest communication with you other than to characterise it as disingenuous and I must ask you why you sent it to me?

The claim is not closed, and, the company saying..."should the claimant wish to reopen the claim"... in their communication to you of 3 August 2012, doesn't make it closed. The company confirmed to you that they would settle the claim in full and according to the rules of the scheme this must be by 8 August 2012. The claim cannot be closed satisfactorily until they settle it in full as they said to you that they would.

Should they fail to settle the claim in full, as they have told you for the first time today, then this will be a very serious breach of your scheme rules, in which event you must take additional serious action against them.

Yours sincerely,

Desyduk

For and on behalf of
Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxxx

[Desyduk]

Re: Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

...And so T-mobile do explain their position to CISAS...

Ladies and gentlemen what you shall read in T-mobile's position as they set it out below is about as human a response that I have seen from T-mobile throughout the whole of this hell of a saga....

Remember, T-mobile claimed the alleged debt is £1092.43, then in their email of 24 July 2012 after offsetting the £10 SAR fee paid to BCW they claimed it was £1082.42 (yes 42 pence).
Below they claim it is £1098.43 (yes £8) and admit a mistake (that is the human bit).

They mistook our claim for £1100 compensation as the outstanding balance of their alleged debt... and they now propose that in having written off the alleged debt and because they mistook our counter-claim as that debt they don't need to compensate our youngster!

What is it they always say...read the small print before you sign..

They go on to persuade CISAS that our claim having been met by them "in full" is therefore closed, unless we wish to reopen it. And CISAS unbelievably fall for it asking me if I wish to reopen the claim!


212121212 Xxxxxxxx v Everything Everywhere (T-Mobile (UK) Limited)
FROM:CISAS
TO: desyduk@allaboutdebt.com

Friday, 3 August 2012, 11:48

Dear Mr Desyduk


Further to our previous correspondence, please see below the company’s response:

‘Good morning

Thank you for your email regarding the above matter.

The Claimant’s claim relates to her purported cancellation of her Service Agreement on 7 January 2009. The Respondent confirms that it did not receive any notice of cancellation on 7 January 2009 as pleaded by the Claimant and therefore the Claimant’s account continued to accrue charges in accordance with Clause 7(a) of the Service Agreement, such payments being taken by Direct Debit.

Notification was subsequently received from the Claimant in November 2011 that she wished to cancel the Service Agreement, and the Respondent processed that request and cancelled the Service Agreement. The Claimant subsequently made an indemnity claim for all charges paid by Direct Debit since January 2009, which left an outstanding balance on her account of £1098.43 which remained correct and due to the Respondent.

Notwithstanding the above, following receipt of the Claimant’s application and in view of the fact that the Claimant had not used the services since January 2009, the Respondent agreed to close the account and waive the balance of £1098.43 as a gesture of goodwill in this matter. The Respondent notes that the Claimant’s application makes reference to wanting the outstanding balance removed, and makes no reference to any further claim of an additional sum of £1100 in compensation, and further no evidence is provided by the Claimant for these sums in any event. The Respondent considered on reviewing the application that the sum of £1100 claimed related to the outstanding balance of the account and not an additional sum in compensation. Therefore the Respondent considers that it has settled the matter in full.

The Respondent further confirms that it provided the Claimant with an explanation of its position and with an apology as requested in the Claimant’s application, and has arranged for the Claimant’s credit file to be updated and for all adverse information to be removed.

I hope that this clarifies matters for you. Should the Claimant wish to reopen the claim we confirm that we would file a defence in relation to the above matter on the basis set out above.

Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any queries.’

Please advise by return if you would like to reopen your claim.

Kind regards

Aiden Gates ACIArb
Case Administrator
Telephone: 0207 520 3827
Switchboard: 0207 520 3800

CISAS
International Dispute Resolution Centre
70 Fleet Street
London
EC4Y 1EU

www.cisas.org.uk/www.idrs.org.

[Desyduk]

Re: Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

Everything Everywhere confirm our youngster's credit file has been cleaned and after telling CISAS they will settle our claim "in full" they are preparing to explain their position to CISAS

RE: Fwd: CISAS Ref 21212121- Xxxxxxx v Everything Everywhere Ltd (T-Mobile) - BC&W Ref:B13456791
FROM: Young, Helen X
TO: desyduk@allaboutdebt.com

Monday, 30 July 2012, 9:58

Dear Mr Desyduk

Further to my previous email, I write to confirm that I have received confirmation from our Credit Queries Department that the default and adverse information has been removed from Ms Xxxxxxx’s credit file. Please note that this can take up to 30 days to be updated by the credit reference agencies themselves.

I note that you have referred this matter back to CISAS and I will be providing them with a response today setting out our position in this matter.

Yours sincerely

Helen Young
Customer Disputes Legal Assistant
Dispute Resolution Legal Affairs
helen.x.young@everythingeverywhere.com

[Desyduk]

Re: Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

I should have added my qualifications to my CISAS correspondence, Jean-Marie's are impressive....ah well too late but just for the record 11+, Cert Ed, BEd(Hons),

City & Guilds plumbing & General DIY....
Shopper
Cook
Cleaner
Chauffeur
Ironer(Irefuse to do her gussets)
and unpaid carer for Grandma

[Desyduk]

Re: Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

CISAS are back on the case now

RE: FAO Selina McHale CISAS Ref 21212121 - Xxxxxxxxxx v Everything Everywhere Ltd (T-Mobile) - BC&W Ref:B12345661

FROM: CISAS
TO: desyduk@allaboutdebt.com

Thursday, 26 July 2012, 10:32

Dear Mr Desyduk,

Thank you for your e-mail.

We note your concerns and will be contacting the company.

We will revert back to you promptly.

Kind regards,


Jean-Marie Sadio BA (Hons) Bsc ( Hons) ACIarb

Telephone: 02075203827
Switchboard: 020 7520 3800

IDRS Limited / CISAS

CISAS
International Dispute Resolution Centre
70 Fleet Street
London
EC4Y 1EU
www.cisas.org.uk / IDRS - International Disaster Services

From:desyduk@allaboutdebt.com
Sent:24 July 2012 19:09
To:CISAS
Subject:FAO Selina McHale CISAS Ref 2121212121 - Xxxxxxx v Everything Everywhere Ltd (T-Mobile) - BC&W Ref:B12123456

Dear Cisas,

Please see below email from Helen Young for Everything Everywhere Ltd.

As you will see Everything Everywhere do not intend to comply fully with the settlement, despite confirming otherwise to you, what can be done?

Desyduk

[Desyduk]

Re: Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

Meanwhile here is the formal complaint submitted to the Information Commissioners Office along with 9 supporting documents (not shown here) and ICO's acknowledgement of the receipt of my emailed complaint.

BC&W say they are registered as a Data Controller as they undertake data handling for purposes other than third party debt recovery.

Their registry entry, Z9810407, Purpose 4, says otherwise, it says they are registered for the purpose of tracing of consumer and commercial debtors and the collection on behalf of creditors and they refused to pass me the data they hold on Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx.

If BC&W's statement is correct, in terms of how any contract that may exist between them and their client operates, then their register entries, those in other company names too, should have purpose 4 deleted as it is misleading to me and the public.

BC&W remitted the £10 fee I sent them with my Subject Access Request (SAR) to Everything Everywhere Limited without my knowledge or agreement, and, BC&W won't refund me the fee.
This £10 fee should be refunded by BC&W to me.

Everything Everywhere Ltd has offset the £10 fee they received from BC&W against the alleged debt they claim from Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx, thereby reducing the alleged debt.
This is a misuse of the SAR fee transferred by BC&W to EE and the £10 should be sent back by EE to BC&W to pass back to me.

Separately, I have sent Everything Everywhere Ltd a SAR to which they have sent me partial data and I have responded requesting all the missing data they hold on Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx. I await the outcome.

Everything Everywhere have not asked me for any fee for the SAR, if they do I will pay it, but, it is unacceptable, to me, to now use the fee that has been misused to offset against the alleged debt as it implies that Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx acknowledges the debt which she doesn't. She has always disputed Everything Everywhere's claim. If the data I requested from EE does not materialise within the statutory period I will add this to the complaint, hopefully this will not be necessary.

Meanwhile, Everything Everywhere and Buchanan Clark & Wells must be admonished by you for misusing the £10 fee paid to their agent for the sole purpose of accessing data under the provisions of the Data Protection Act.


We have received your email
FROM: new casework
TO: desyduk@allaboutdebt.com
Message flagged
Thursday, 26 July 2012, 12:43

Thank you for emailing the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO). This is an automatic acknowledgement to tell you we have received your email safely. Please do not reply to this email.

If your email was about a new complaint or request for advice it will be considered by our Customer Contact Department. One of our case officers will be in touch as soon as possible. If you have sent us a complaint we may need specific information from you before we are able to consider it. You can find out the type of information we would need from the complaints section of our website.

[Desyduk]

Re: Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

I've taken young Darren's advice, BC&W, and formally complained to the Information Commissioners Office and I sent him this reply to his email and copied to Everyone Everywhere Limited.

Re: B11223344 FAO Lorna Morrison 1
FROM: desyduk@allaboutdebt.com
TO: Contact Us Mailbox BCW group
CC: Helen XYoung Everything Everywhere
Message flagged

Thursday, 26 July 2012, 13:53


Dear Mr Carruthers,

I copied you in on my correspondence with Everything Everywhere, specifically concerning my complaints to you and your client regarding the Subject Access Fee of £10 payed to you, misused by you and also by your client to infer through your client's billing process that it was a payment toward the alleged disputed debt and thereby a de facto acknowledgement of the debt. We emphatically refute any inference that may be construed that this fee was a payment toward any alleged debt or acknowledgement of any alleged debt.

See the attached scan of your clients bill dated 9 July 2012, which demonstrates that which I have complained about to you and your client.

Contrary to your assurance to me in your email of 16 July 2012, that your client will be happy to address any further concerns I have, your client has demonstrated that he is unwilling to address this matter and several more, as you can see from Helen Young's last email to me.

What do you intend to do about it?

Meanwhile thank you for your advice regarding the Information Commissioners they have acknowledged receipt of my formal complaint.

Yours sincerely,

Desyduk

For and on behalf of
Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxxx

[Desyduk]

Re: Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

After 2 days of deliberation with their client T-mobile, and, no doubt with much costly legal advice, BC&W respond.

Buchanan Clerk & Willys and T-mobile will have a contract between them that addresses the point concerning which of the two will act as Data Controller in relation to their debt recovery activities.

However it's probably worth me complaining about BC&W's register entry, specifically purpose 4, to request the Information Commissioners to have this removed in the light of BC&W's position in this matter which misleads the public.


RE: B11223344 FAO Lorna Morrison
FROM:Contact Us Mailbox BCW Group
TO:'desyduk@allaboutdebt.com'
Monday, 16 July 2012, 9:31

Dear Mr Desyduk,

Your comments have again been noted. However the position taken by this office pertinent to our details on the public register, our relationship with our client in this matter and our prescribed obligations to which we must adhere in these circumstances remains unchanged. If you wish to pursue this matter further I can only advise that you do so formally to the Information Commissioners Office. We will happily liaise with the Commissioner’s Office and assist them in bringing about a resolution to this matter.

Similarly, our stated position relevant to the Data Access Request, the prerequisite fee of £10.00 remitted to our client and our general conduct in this matter has already been addressed. We have discussed matters further with our client who has stated that any further enquiries in this regard should be sent to them directly. They will be happy to address any further concerns you have in these matters.

Yours sincerely,

Darren Carruthers
Quality Assurance Officer
BCW Group

[Desyduk]

Re: Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

Thank you again Cleverclogs I sent them your link on Bastille Day

From:desyduk@allaboutdebt.com
Sent: 14 July 2012 13:27
To: Contact Us Mailbox BCW Group
Subject: Re: B11223344 FAO Lorna Morrison

Dear Mr Carruthers,

Below is the link to The Data Protection Public Register.

http://www.ico.gov.uk/ESDWebPages/DoSearch.asp

Enter your company´s registration number Z9810407

You will see under Purpose 4 of your registration as a Data Controller that you describe this purpose as ´The tracing of consumer and commercial debtors and the collection on behalf of creditors´.

This purpose is specifically for debt recovery for third parties, which you have steadfastly denied, you are demonstrably incorrect.

What have you to say.

Yours sincerely,

Desyduk

For and on behalf of
Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx

[Desyduk]

Re: Phones4U/T-Mobile/BCW Hell

I disagree with BC&W too on the basis of their register entry details with the Information Commissioners.

From:"desyduk@allaboutdebt.com"
To: “contactus@bcwgroup.com”
Sent: Friday, 13 July 2012, 23:11
Subject: Re: B11223344 FAO Lorna Morrison

Dear Mr Carruthers,

As you know I am away from home and can´t easily access the internet.

Firstly, thank you for responding to my last email but I must correct you, I sent a Subject Access Request to your client some time ago by recorded delivery, your client is not responding to the ´Data Access Request´ I made to you, despite any similar request you may have passed on to your client.

Your client, in his stupidity, simply told you to give him the statutory ten pound fee I paid to you and he banked this against his unbilled, disputed, unproven and finally defeated claim against Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx after she recovered the money your client had stolen from her bank account without her knowledge over years.

Your client is only now scratching around in an attempt to put right other failings now that he has accepted Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx´s counter claims in full. That is the reason why your client has only now asked you for your data, and that will be confirmed by the data when we have it.

As I have told you before, your client has played you and you have been happy to oblige, operating under the terms of ´ignorance being blissful then why be wise´, to paraphrase Sean O´Casey, this is not good enough. You have caused enormous stress to Xxxxxxxxx and her mother, damaging your own reputation into the bargain you have with your client.

No Mr Carruthers, I sent you the 10 pound fee for your data. Any issue arising as a result of your decision to give that fee away to a third party must be addressed by you, you gave it away. Besides as I have been telling you, and bombarding you with unanswered correspondence we have sent to your client, your client doesn´t listen to his customers, he hasn´t listened to us, and, we´re not now going to start doing your work by asking him to give you back our money. Your client has clearly, in writing to, us shown that he has used this ten pounds statutory Data Protection Act Access fee that you gave him to offset against his failed claim against Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx. This is a gross abuse by you and your client, what do you intend to do about it.

Your registration as a Data Controller states among other things that it is for the purpose of you undertaking debt collection on behalf of third parties, and, not for purposes other than third party debt collection, you clearly haven´t read it. When I´m back in the UK I´ll send you chapter and verse, something needs to change because you’re giving one story to me and another to the Information Commissioners.

Mr Carruthers I really don´t wish to be rude but between your client and you I am so sick of dealing with ignorance, please just read the registration entries that I gave you already.

Thanks for your link, I read it many moons ago and as I told you I obtained advice on the subject from the Information Commisioners which I repeated to you already, do you remember, he said ~ you can´t have it both ways, but it appears you´re still trying!

Mr Carruthers I can assure you that your involvement in this matter will not cease because your client says you can withdraw.

I look forward to your response, after you have read your data controller registration details.

Yours sincerely

Desyduk