Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • pould
    • By pould 19th Jun 17, 8:50 AM
    • 99Posts
    • 84Thanks
    pould
    What is or isn't a data protection breach?
    • #1
    • 19th Jun 17, 8:50 AM
    What is or isn't a data protection breach? 19th Jun 17 at 8:50 AM
    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?
Page 1
    • pappa golf
    • By pappa golf 19th Jun 17, 9:38 AM
    • 7,635 Posts
    • 7,883 Thanks
    pappa golf
    • #2
    • 19th Jun 17, 9:38 AM
    • #2
    • 19th Jun 17, 9:38 AM
    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?
    Originally posted by pould
    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
    • By The Deep 19th Jun 17, 9:41 AM
    • 7,374 Posts
    • 6,421 Thanks
    The Deep
    • #3
    • 19th Jun 17, 9:41 AM
    • #3
    • 19th Jun 17, 9:41 AM
    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.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • pould
    • By pould 19th Jun 17, 9:46 AM
    • 99 Posts
    • 84 Thanks
    pould
    • #4
    • 19th Jun 17, 9:46 AM
    • #4
    • 19th Jun 17, 9:46 AM
    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.
    Originally posted by The Deep
    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
    • By pappa golf 19th Jun 17, 9:50 AM
    • 7,635 Posts
    • 7,883 Thanks
    pappa golf
    • #5
    • 19th Jun 17, 9:50 AM
    • #5
    • 19th Jun 17, 9:50 AM
    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
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

371Posts Today

4,787Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • I believe I can boldly go where no twitter poll has gone before https://t.co/HA0jC92gAK

  • OK I'm wilting to public pressure and there will be a star trek captain's poll at some point next week

  • I can get that. My order is 1. Picard 2. Janeway 3. Kirk. Too early to say where Lorca will end up (or would you? https://t.co/kawtCOe9RA

  • Follow Martin