Abbey summary spreadsheets - fact or fiction?

[ellie]

Hi,

Anybody had any experience of the summary spreadsheets provided to cover 04-05? I've nattered with a few people over the road (both directions) and we're all a bit suspicious that all charges are not included. For example on my spreadie in one month I had NINE cleared transactions (I know, irresponsible of me) but no unauthorised OD charge. Now you are not telling me that by clearing all of those payments they didn't take me over my limit! In fact there are no unauthorised OD charges at all for the period only covered by the spreadsheet. This is exactly the same for at least 2 other people I am aware of. I must admit that I've lost patience and started my claim anyway as I have a large overdraft with them that they are getting inpatient about. I guess that I really need to file a non compliance claim - yes? What bothers me though is whether this is now getting to be a big problem with them and whether some kind of bigger action is needed (don't ask me what though....)

Nice to be here though -speak again soon.

Ellie

[Paradox]

Hi Ellie, I do agree that it seems unlikely, however I have no real experience with Abbey, so I'll just say hello, and bump your thread back to the top for an Abbey claimant to have a look at.

It's good to have you here.

Matt

[Glenn UK]

What you need is some evidence that the info supplied is incorrect or at least incomplete.

I have been speaking to someone on a similar issue with Barclaycard, the ICO contact i have has had anecdotal evidence but has not seen one claim where it can be substantiated that information has been doctored or withheld.

in fact she hasn't seen any claims in writing about doctored or withheld info of this kind at all.

so if you or anyone else has this kind of info and can substantiate it i can guarantee to get it in front of someone who wants to see it if its about.

Glenn

[iancognito]

Strikes me what you need is someone organised enough to have kept their original statements then to send an SAR anyway to see what comes back.

[ellie]

Yes I know but not managed that yet.

I got excited when i found an old statement from the period on top of the gas boiler (don't ask) but sadly it was one of the rarer months that didn't have a single charge.

Maybe we've all gone a bit conspiracy theorist and Abbey had an unauthorised overdraft amnesty during that time?

Ellie

[Mochamoos]

I am doing a claim for a friend of mine and she has the spreadsheet, she is convinced that she had double the amount of charges than printed on the spread sheet but does not have her statemtns to prove it

[ellie]

its a problem. Abbey really are a law unto themselves. I can't see a way of forcing the issue without the the evidence Glenn suggested as i know at least one person has contacted the ICO who have said that the spreadsheet is a legitimate way of providing the info. I was contemplating attempting to get older information from them (pre 6 years) but having read of others attempts I think it may be a waste of time. Apparently if they say they've destroyed data then we have to believe them... Didn't i read somewhere though that they are meant to keep financial information longer in order to comply with money laundering legislation - or did I make that up?

Ellie

[Glenn UK]

its a problem. Abbey really are a law unto themselves. I can't see a way of forcing the issue without the the evidence Glenn suggested as i know at least one person has contacted the ICO who have said that the spreadsheet is a legitimate way of providing the info. As far as I am aware its not the format that is the issue at all, only the data they hold and proving it is incorrect. I had statements apart from one or two back to the account opening in Apr 1997. I used those to compile my list of charges where i had them and never found any discrepancies, but then maybe i was lucky. I was contemplating attempting to get older information from them (pre 6 years) but having read of others attempts I think it may be a waste of time. Apparently if they say they've destroyed data then we have to believe them This is true in effect but if you have any evidence that they hold data longer there are ways of making them look very hard and giving you a sworn statement to the effect they don't hold the data.... Didn't i read somewhere though that they are meant to keep financial information longer in order to comply with money laundering legislation - or did I make that up? The companies act, cant remember the paragraph says they have to keep financial records (accounts) for six years (public companies) and also says they have to show day by day transactions.

However, this doesn't prove they have records older than six years and even if this is the case it would need the arguments to be put together to ensure that the court forced the bank to provide the details required under the DPA.

Whether they, the bank that is, could argue that the production of your data required undue effort would also need to be considered.

.

Ellie

Just a few thoughts