SUBJECT ACCESS NON-COMPLIANCE ( inc but not limited to sections.14(1) , 45, 54 Data Protection Act 2018 ) Baroness.oftheHouseof+Hobbs_851_OL503@gmail.com 24 July 2025 To: MR CHARLES ALAN NUNN in the position of CEO OFFICER for LLOYDS BANK PLC Corporation/State 25 GRESHAM STREET LONDON [EC2V 7HN] charlie.nunn@lloydsbanking.com , pmstgmo@lloydsbanking.com, GCT-MiddleOffice@lloydsbanking.com , iccocasework@icco.org.uk , Acts of Fraud contra the 1862 Conveyance of Real Estates Act Our Ref}GDPR - DPA 2018 Subject Access Request Non Disclosure HOH—CHARLES ALAN NUNN LLOYDS BANK PLC CEO—HOHO851 Dear MR CHARLES ALAN NUNN , Valid GDPR requests [Subject Access ‘SAR’] were submitted including on September 13th 2019 ; &. And 2 October 2022 March 20 th 2022; &. And May 18 th 2025 requesting all informations, you hold/have held upon us. Our requests remain unfulfilled. The Information Commissioners office were given your non compliance as a ‘referral’ and they will be updated regarding your non-compliance on any of these occasions. You having failed to supply the data we requested within the statutory 1 month limit or the longer period provided. Please explain why your body— natural / corporate / politick have failed to fully comply with our GDPR, subject access request? The data types you have failed to supply are listed below} 1. In readable, unencrypted electronic and hard copy format each and any record of data in respect of the above requester. [We have neither wish nor obligation, as non-members of your body, to go through additional procedures such as—electronic data boxes controlled by your corporation or any third party, requiring we create an account and log in—your corps have enacted for informations extracted/exchanged/obtained in terrorem & without our consent/contract/collateral contract/agreement/obligation]. a) 1)Under CPR 83.2 & CPR 83.13(8)(a) A warrant of control may only be issued following a valid court order...which mist be issued and sealed by a court officer. It is essential that this warrant is signed and properly sealed to be valid...without the proper court seal and signature, the warrant cannot be deemed to have been lawfully issued, and thus cannot support any action of enforcement. a) 2) Police officers are not empowered to enforce civil debts or judgments. They have a duty to ensure that they are not enabling unlawful enforcement a) 3) Should the police fail to recognise the absence of a valid warrant (or act in a manner that implicitly condones unlawful enforcement) this could be construed as enabling fraudulent conduct. a) 4) The FOIA/SAR presented to the Ministry of Justice yielded confirmation that neither of the two (sic) court reference numbers supplied by Lloyds Banks plc and their agents, including Aberdein Considine, were valid court case numbers and as such all and any documents pretending to claim ‘judgment’, ‘Warrant of Control‘ with no Claim Form, Particulars and claim Evidence being shown to us 2) Additionally, it has been made public that your corporation is bankrupt through Liens served upon it “ the CEOs of HSBOS (the Lloyds group), HSBC, Ukar (Bradford and Bingley and Northern Rock) and others, are all operating fraudulently on the basis that they have been bankrupted by at least one lien being issued against them. Have they resigned? If not, they are operating illegally in their roles. “ and we wish to have you substaniate the claims made in this regard—as seen at https://tinyurl.com/roguemale-240121-lien4crypto The presentatiom of instruments detailed in 1, 1a) 1), 1a) 2), 1a) 3) , 1a) 4) is required, as requested since our first request; there is additional requirement for the instrument of authentication regarding points 2. We shall allow you a further 7 [seven] days to respond, in full, to the requests. We also reserve the right to issue proceedings under s169 of the Act to seek compensation for any damage (including distress) ; &. And also the Contempt of court act for your failure to comply. Within this our notice of ‘Non Compliance with our Subject Access Request’, we have attached a further copy of the Baron David Ward Affidavit of truth and statement of fact, an accepted &. unrebutted legal instrument. This legal instrument was provided for your careful consideration, which having received no response—no claims contra by way of ‘point for point’, no rebuttals within forty eight hours [48hrs] or ever, after which time if there remains points unrebutted or there is a silence over the instrument, the instrument is accepted in its entirety. We look forward to receiving your response, per the General Data Protection Regulation. If you do not normally deal with these requests, please pass this letter to your Data Protection Officer, or relevant staff member advising us of these details. For and on behalf of the Principal legal embodiment by the title of MRS YVONNE HOBBS For and on behalf of the Attorney General of the House of Hobbs For and on behalf of Baroness Baroness Yvonne of the House of Hobbs