Private Parking Company demanding driver information by threatening the ‘Norwich Phar

Sirdan

esmerobbo wrote: »

Mentioned this Norwich Pharmacal threat to a friend of a friend who is a solicitor last night, whilst having a sherbet or two. After he stopped laughing, he said it would cost them at least £400 and if it was allocated for a longer hearing by the Judge could cost thousands!

Even giving some of them are a bit dense I cant see many spending £400 plus to claim £100!!

He then went on to say if I get a invoice in the future tell them it was him driving, He said he could do with a laugh! [I don't think he was serious solicitors don't lie do they] Oh hang on Graham White?

Are you calling GW a liar ..tsk careful he may sue for damage to his professional reputation ..if he does make sure you have your cheque book handy ..hmm are cheques valid for £0.00 ??..:rotfl:

spike7451

spike7451 wrote: »

I would tell them to file their papers where the sun don't shine for two reasons;

Freedom of information act


Personal Security

Sirdan wrote: »

Care to explain how either of those points are relevant ?

1-You don't know how the company that contacted you will use that data,how they store it & that they won't misuse it.
2-For me personally & others that I know,I would not like my details given out without my consent due to my background & situation.

As these companies use dodgy practices already,how can the guarantee that they will treat any information you give them in a responsible manner.

real1314

spike7451 wrote: »

1-You don't know how the company that contacted you will use that data,how they store it & that they won't misuse it.
2-For me personally & others that I know,I would not like my details given out without my consent due to my background & situation.

As these companies use dodgy practices already,how can the guarantee that they will treat any information you give them in a responsible manner.

But how does any of that relate to the Freedom of Information Act?

The FoI Act relates to the enforecement of providing information, not withholding it. Furthermore, it relates solely to public bodies, not individuals and not private companies.

Sirdan

spike7451 wrote: »

1-You don't know how the company that contacted you will use that data,how they store it & that they won't misuse it.
2-For me personally & others that I know,I would not like my details given out without my consent due to my background & situation.

As these companies use dodgy practices already,how can the guarantee that they will treat any information you give them in a responsible manner.

1)That is covered by the data protection Act not FOI and DVLA will give them the Keeper data. If that's not you then i agree why give them more data to misuse.

2) if you are the R/K of a vehicle then the DVLA WILL give your data out and your only recourse will be IF the people they give it to misuse it.

see this :-
http://www.ico.gov.uk/for_the_public/topic_specific_guides/dvla.aspx

esmerobbo

The only act you need is the "I ain't telling you act 0001"

A Norwich Pharmacal Order is just not going to happen, it's just a bluff to worry the unknowing! Even sec 172 of the RTA cant force you to tell them who was driving. It just means if you don't the RK gets nicked!

Pacemaker1000_2

think about it

i have had correspondence demanding i give them information!
i don't know really WHO they are or what they could do with it. i agree with the above poster i have NO intenetion of giving anyone personal information unless the law tells me i have too! especially as there is a possibility of more than one driver and they haven't specified which one they want

Sirdan

ripped_off_driver wrote: »

Norwich Pharmacal not available in Small Claims, so a non starter. There are many other reasons why it is a total no go, but PPCs do like to lie. It is after all what the whole industry is built on.

Er, I beg to differ ACS had NPO and their claims were £495 against each individual named ..surely that is small claims isn't it ? Or are IP rights dealt with outside of Small Claims regardless of the amount claimed ?

peter_the_piper

Sirdan wrote: »

Er, I beg to differ ACS had NPO and their claims were £495 against each individual named ..surely that is small claims isn't it ? Or are IP rights dealt with outside of Small Claims regardless of the amount claimed ?

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/4572-acs-law-judgement-raises-questions-over-dea.html

27 people seem to be involved so would this be small claims?

System

An NPO can not be heard and actioned in a small claims court. I'm not even sure that it can be heard by a county court judge.

Sirdan

peter_the_piper wrote: »

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/4572-acs-law-judgement-raises-questions-over-dea.html

27 people seem to be involved so would this be small claims?

I read it as 27 individual claims against each individual ,for £495 each .