What is or isn't a data protection breach?

pould · 19 June 2017 at 8:50AM

Folks,

Expecting to receive a PCN for Smart Parking. Not worried about it for all the obvious reasons (not PoFA compliant etc).

However, given that Smart Parking often loses at POPLA on the PoFA grounds, I'm wondering whether to be even more pre-emptive and get in a data protection claim at this point. The reasoning would be as follows.

i) Smart Parking attempt to claim under the PoFA
ii) Numerous POPLA appeals have rejected Smart Parking's NTK on the basis that it does not meet the necessary PoFA criteria
iii) Data can only be obtained from the DVLA on the basis of a valid claim and given that Smart Parking's NTK has been ruled to be deficient on a number of occasions the registered keeper's details were obtained from the DVLA under false pretences (i.e. they were obtained to make a claim under the PoFA when Smart Parking know that their NTK does not meet the criteria).

Wondering whether it's worth going straight for the jugular with the threat of a £1000 claim at the point of first appeal?

Thoughts?

pappa_golf · 19 June 2017 at 9:38AM

pould wrote: »

Folks,

Expecting to receive a PCN for Smart Parking. Not worried about it for all the obvious reasons (not PoFA compliant etc).

However, given that Smart Parking often loses at POPLA on the PoFA grounds, I'm wondering whether to be even more pre-emptive and get in a data protection claim at this point. The reasoning would be as follows.

i) Smart Parking attempt to claim under the PoFA
ii) Numerous POPLA appeals have rejected Smart Parking's NTK on the basis that it does not meet the necessary PoFA criteria
iii) Data can only be obtained from the DVLA on the basis of a valid claim and given that Smart Parking's NTK has been ruled to be deficient on a number of occasions the registered keeper's details were obtained from the DVLA under false pretences (i.e. they were obtained to make a claim under the PoFA when Smart Parking know that their NTK does not meet the criteria).

Wondering whether it's worth going straight for the jugular with the threat of a £1000 claim at the point of first appeal?

Thoughts?

on your reckoning no one would be able to apply to the DVLA on any case in scotland

POFA , in england either use it and gl after the owner as the law permits , or dont use it and have to prove who was driving that day

The_Deep · 19 June 2017 at 9:41AM

I think that landowners and their agents have a right to know who owns cars parked on their land, and to this end, obtaining owner's details from the DVLA is in order.

However, when driver identity is not forthcoming, it is my opinion that badgering the RK for money becomes a breach of that data. No doubt we will have more rulings from the courts shortly. We have six years to make them pay.

pould · 19 June 2017 at 9:46AM

The_Deep wrote: »

I think that landowners and their agents have a right to know who owns cars parked on their land, and to this end, obtaining owner's details from the DVLA is in order.

However, when driver identity is not forthcoming, it is my opinion that badgering the RK for money becomes a breach of that data. No doubt we will have more rulings from the courts shortly. We have six years to make them pay.

I think that's an interesting approach. Once I've pointed out that their NTK does not meet the PoFA criteria, and further use of my data becomes a data protection breach.

I think that's the path I'll pursue.

pappa_golf · 19 June 2017 at 9:50AM

well yes and no , any company or individual has a right to start a county court claim within 6 yrs , ok they might loose , but they can try if thy want .

so by deleting your info now , how can they do this

What is or isn't a data protection breach?

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free