Question on data rights and loans

[Hiddentruth]

All lawyers out there, can you help?

Where a loan might be wanted to be taken out by one party for their divorce fees and that loan is going to be secured on jointly owned assets can you help explain with respect to the other joint owner or indeed owners of those assets, how their data gets handled in such a scenario?

Can you explain the rights of these other owners to be credit checked within any application, to comment, object or anything else. Or even to know about it?

Normally any loan has a cooling off period. How would that work too in respect of the non applicant but somebody who is affected by it?

It would be good to get some views on this. I know GDPR changes make us all more aware but we had DPA 1998 for a long time...what would be the situation with 1998 as opposed to the 2018 DPA do you think?

All comments would be welcomed...

I have explained it over and over.

And since I don’t know exactly what information is being processed, because I haven’t had sight of the documentation, I’m not going to give any further advice.

Should you furnish that information, I’m sure you will get more specific advice. I am uncomfortable giving specific advise on a public forum where I lack that information.

In general terms ONLY:

If the information is in the public domain, the borrower doesn’t need the consent of the other spouse to disclose that information to Novitas.

If the information is such that Novitas need it to satisfy a legal obligation then they do not need the consent of the other spouse to obtain that information.

If the processing of the information is necessary for the purpose of legitimate interest, then Novitas do not need the consent of the other spouse to obtain that information.

Should there be other personal data that does not fall within these grounds, then Novitas are placing the obligation on the borrower to secure the necessary consent.

THIS INFORMATION IS BEING PROVIDED FROM WHAT I HAVE READ HERE AND WHAT INFORMATION HAS BEEN PROVIDED ON THIS THREAD ONLY. THIS STATEMENT SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON AS I HAVE NOT SEEN THE DOCUMENTS SOECIFICALLY USED IN THESE SCENARIOS.

@feelliketomhanks - honestly, you’ve been crystal clear. Couldn’t be any clearer. To anyone who actually wants to understand, that is.

Excuse spelling. Cracked screen.

This part has not been dealt with

provided the individual to whom the information relates with a copy of this notice

Obviously it Is the DH who should provide a copy of the form to op but he doesn’t want her to know about the loan. so as I have asked previously if his solicitor knows that he has not given her a copy of the form and the loan is to pay his/ her fees does the solicitor have a duty to the court to disclose this loan?

I also asked if the loan company knew that “other representatives” had not been given a copy of the form would they still grant the loan?

Comes to something when we are putting disclaimers on anonymous threads! Bloody hell

You must ensure that in respect of any information you provide us with, which does not relate to you (for example, information about your representatives), you have obtained the necessary consent in order to disclose such information and provided the individual to whom the information relates with a copy of this notice (including any child/ren 13 years old or over)

That’s the whole quote.

As I read it there will be no obligation to provide the information if one of the other lawful basis are being used. That could be wrong. I’m a DP professional. not a contract professional.

As to the loan company. The loan company won’t care. That para is specifically to disclaim their liability.

@Feelliketomhanks

This -

If the information is such that Novitas need it to satisfy a legal obligation then they do not need the consent of the other spouse to obtain that information.

who is the legal obligation too?

I’m beginning to feel liketom hanks - Groundhog Day !,!

Any legal obligation. To anyone. I’m not familiar with the loans and the info and the legalities around them so it may be that that basis isn’t used at all.

So @Feelsliketomhanks are you now sayiny you are not actually expereinced/ qualified to answer what is being asked here?

I can answer on the data protection side in general terms. But specifically, on specifics, no one can answer and is qualified to answer because we don’t have sight of all the documents we would need to have sight of.

I’ve said from I first came on the thread that I’m a DP professional. I’ve never purported to be anything else.

Groundhog Day was Bill Murray btw.

@MrsWobble3 have I read this right?

Additionally, it would not be a commercially viable product if it required consent from the other party to the litigation as I imagine it's pretty unlikely to be granted.

So in these discussions Op would not have given her consent if she knew about it - and your saying this is likely to be the situation in all litigation cases, ie if one party is applying for loan the other party is unlikely to agree to this loan

So the loan will be designed to be lawfully operated without requiring consent. That clause will be included as standard practice and for the avoidance of doubt, not because there is an expectation of needing to obtain consent.

So basically the loan company know that divorcing couples are likely to disagree to a loan by either party and so the document being signed by either party will be worded in such a way so that it does not matter that one or other party would not agree to it?

And the clause included for the avoidance of doubt - who’s protection is this for?

Help me out here @Hiddentruth am I reading this right?

Apologies was thinking Forrest Gump!

So you cannot answer in relation to legal obligation or explain what this means?

I can’t answer on legal obligation because I don’t know what personal data has been provided.

Legal obligarion is things like duty to disclose to the court, duty to process relating to tax purposes.

ico guidance here

Please don’t be so rude to me. I am trying to help with very limited information.

*obligation

And I said already that depending on the personal data being processed, and the purpose of the processing, that basis may not apply.

This is impossible to answer without knowing what information was provided and when and the communications between the parties.

who is the legal obligation too?

I think you are confused about the word 'obligation' here. It's not an obligation to anyone. It's an obligation to do something because the law requires you to do it.

So if organisation A is legally required to keep certain information about person X, then that in itself is legal justification for keeping that information. The consent of X is not necessary.

@Zsazsajuju

The questions have been answered many times by many people greenberet.

No they had not - answers had been given but they were not specific to the question

Just not any answers to back up crazy conspiracy theories

JUst to reiterate what I said in one of my deleted posts - I have all the emails that confirm what I said happened in my case happened - this makes it a fact- there’s is no conspiracy to what I’m doing,

Your description of me as abusive is extraordinary. I’m sorry but that obviously makes me sceptical of your claims re your marriage.

You said this directed at Hiddentruth My thoughts are you are quite a controlling individual and are pretty enraged that your ex dared to finally stand up to you. Just a theory but you need therapy, not all this paranoia about loans

And my reply to you was

zsazs - true to form! I think you need to follow some of your own advic - you may not recognise your comments as abusive but passive aggressive behaviour is abusive and you are way belowa the belt!

I stand by what I said and for someone who says this “Domestic abuse is a very serious topic. It’s not something to be taken lightly.” You have completely contradicted yourself as you are saying that Hiddentruths claims of domestic abuse are just her x standing up to her! Fggking outrageous!

You have a great knack of misconstruing what has been said and to then relay something completely different - I’m not sure why you do this or what you get out of it

As I understand it from other threads you didn’t work for many years (you claim you couldn’t because of above tax evasion)

No due to long term depression - there is no tax evasio!

and were outraged that you had to cover your sons school fees from general maintenance as your ex said he couldn’t afford anything else

YES I was becuse it is all lies and don’t forget my Ds was suicidal at the time and I had just been shafted y the Legal process

That wouldn’t constitute abuse for me. He may or may not be lying but it’s hardly abuse.

Anyone who knows about abuse knows it is not an isolated incident but repeated actions that form a pattern

I find it wholly offensive that you continually dismiss two women’s claims of abuse when the details are on MN - In my case long before I called the repeated patterns of behaviour abuse!

I CAn only assume you get some pleasure from your behaviour because I can see no other reason to do it!

@NotDavidTenant

I think you are confused about the word 'obligation' here. It's not an obligation to anyone. It's an obligation to do something because the law requires you to do it.

SO in relation to this

If the information is such that Novitas need it to satisfy a legal obligation then they do not need the consent of the other spouse to obtain that information.

so novitas have the right to the ops info because they need it to satisfy a law that applies to them is this right?

BUt the form also says that a copy is given to representatives - is this to satisfy the same law?

As the Spartans said to the Greeks.

Been away for a few glorious hours of festive celebrations and need to read what has been said carefully but my first scan through I have a very important request please....

I started this thread. I would like it to continue because despite the bumpy road it has travelled there are some important issues being discussed here.

It would be a great shame for it to get deleted so given that swearing helps nobody and certainly personal slights are also without merit can we all continue with some decorum and in respect of the fair warning by Mumsnet?

No more swear words please. It is exasperating at times but these are critical operational points of law and regulation and we could do with bottoming this out. It is clearly interesting lots of people.

If I can just remind people that if a litigation loan is undeclared and property is sold under the auspices of the loan holding side in absence of a conveyancing contract it has been established for me by proper legal folk that there is a duty of care nonetheless to any parties with beneficial interests so if the whole loan is top sliced from the honeypot of monies remaining before division into each settlement tranche then what has been achieved there...Remember the loan is not declared....is that considered a 'win' with sniggers in abundance down the pub or is that plain and simple fraud?

“Proper legal folk”

You just can’t help yourself, can you?

If you have access to “proper legal folk” who have told you there’s a cause of action, why aren’t you doing that? Clearly you are able to access real life advice, so what’s the point of this thread?

I started this thread. I would like it to continue

Why? This isn't a specialist legal forum, or a website where moral or legal or ethical issues are debated? It's a website full of random women. No common legal expertise, no common academic experience. You might as well post on Facebook or Instagram.

There's nothing anyone can post that could be remotely helpful to you, other than providing you with a cathartic outlet.

I’ve read some of your past threads. You are very very angry and upset with your ex and life and the world and everyone.

I would strongly advise you to try to find a way to put it behind you and move forward with your life. This level of anger and bitterness will do you no good.

I was abused by my ex. Physically, mentally, financially and sexually. He had an OW. I thought I was going insane. I left in the middle of the night in the clothes I stood up in. He owns his own business and has a clever accountant - I would never get a penny of maintenance.

I had to let go of the past and forge my own path. And I have. And I’m happy. My house is small, but it’s mine. I’m working in a job I absolutely love, and I’m content.

I hope some day you can find the same.

My particular case has a number of aspects to it. I certainly did not mean any disrespect by saying 'proper legal folk' I just said that to differentiate between friendly advice say and paid advice. I had some insurance which could look at one element about contracts but that is not looking at the full picture of matters raised in this case.

My case is being considered by regulators but do not mistake that I have money for continuing'proper legal advice' which is why regulators are so key here because I was run out of money...can you see what has happened here...I have paid for legal advice in good faith and representation on wholly false pretences which is about as much use as a chocolate fireguard and also paid ex bill too ...and other issues but let's not complicate things.

I don"t know how qualified or otherwise people are on these legal threads. There is certainly little sympathy or empathy on this thread and nor did I ask for any but I hoped to garner opinion on the issue of my rights which have been royally trampled on.

As for anger. I am angry that the system can allow and facilitate abuse in and of itself because professionals are actually not joining up the dots and seeing that what is underway is actually financial abuse.

It is not an everyday occurrence for human rights to be breached over property especially when someone is a legal owner with restrictions on title deeds.

I am very concerned that this harm is in fact being rolled out and is commonplace and that people have no idea what is happening to their data and are being stolen from by distraction burglary techniques.

If anything this undermining and unequal set up seems a throw back to the dark ages . I cannot even fulfill my obligations to HMRC... on CGT calcs as my settlement property is still co-owned by ex 2 years on and Lord knows what was really paid for the rest.

So I was asking people to think about this.

Maintenance and champerty is not unlawful any more is it...is this why for the most part there is a response on this thread that this is okay?

Bailli.org has many cases where Novitas Loans are cited in proceedings so it is clearly not the norm to hide them.

Anyone with any case law testing the matters raised in this thread ?