Court Summons

Coupon-mad

barry22 wrote: »

Hello, just to let you know the claim has been discontinued by MIL (which I have been led to understand is an acronym for Money grabbing Inept Litigants). I awaited confirmation of this from the court before posting as I have heard that MIL have form in this regard.
Thank you all for your help and support in this matter. I hope that my defense points will be of assistance to future victims of MIL.

Yay!

You do realise that every MIL case where the data originated from the DVLA, can mean you can now sue MIL and the parking firm for a hefty sum in compensation and it's one of the circumstances where it seems nailed on, as long as the claim is worded well and the court procedure followed?

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/parking-companies-breaking-data.html

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/dvla-confirm-massive-data-protection.html

You don't have to rush to do it now but this can be done by you, with just a court fee then (if neither party settles) a hearing fee, £50 tops, which you include in your claim to get back. And you don't even have the burden of having to prove any loss:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5585388

Rude not to claim £750 as per Halliday, bearing in mind the data was used to seriously harass and alarm the keeper who was dragged into defending a court claim, yet MIL had no right to process the data and the parking firm had no right to sell it (ignorance of KADOE rules and/or lack of due diligence with data supplied by the DVLA, not being any excuse for serious data misuse).

To build evidence, start with a complaint to the ICO about MIL and the parking firm, citing the recent DVLA emails to people:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/mil-collections-promises-dvla-it-will.html

You can get a DVLA email yourself, to use as evidence. Email and ask Mr Dunford if the parking firm were allowed to sell your data to MIL (we know they were not, if the data came from the DVLA and not from you appealing):

david.dunford@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

...do that and the ICO complaint. Build your evidence for court FIRST - and then claim, with help from here.

HTH

barry22

Hello, yes, mil wrote to say they had dropped the claim and it was confirmed by the court a couple of weeks later. In regard to data protection violations, I'm not sure mil themselves are culpable, isn't it the original instigators who then "sold" my details to mil? And of course my landlord, who are ultimately responsible for the actions of their agents.
DVLA have confirmed that they supplied my details so I will contact them again in regard to mil, and then take it from there. Many thanks for your help.

DoaM

That's the point I think ... you go after the PPC as they are not allowed to sell your details on. You also go after MIL because they are using your details whilst having no reason to have them in the first place.

Coupon-mad

barry22 wrote: »

Hello, yes, mil wrote to say they had dropped the claim and it was confirmed by the court a couple of weeks later. In regard to data protection violations, I'm not sure mil themselves are culpable, isn't it the original instigators who then "sold" my details to mil? And of course my landlord, who are ultimately responsible for the actions of their agents.
DVLA have confirmed that they supplied my details so I will contact them again in regard to mil, and then take it from there. Many thanks for your help.

MIL are also culpable for 'purchasing' and then processing (and continuing to process) your data - negligence by their data controller in failing to make basic checks that DVLA-supplied data can be 'bought & sold'.

Also I would suggest MIL should be named because it is their aggressive business practice that dragged you to court claim defence stage which is what has caused you 'significant alarm and distress'. So that meets the requirement to show such distress caused by one or both of the defendants you will be suing for 3 figure compensation. £750 is reasonable to plan for, as per Halliday.

No rush though, get your evidence. An ICO complaint upheld against MIL and the parking firm (both) would be great, to start this process, as well as an email from the DVLA confirming that MIL were not allowed to process this data which cannot be bought & sold.

barry22

Update: After a consultation with the residents, my landlord is planning to continue using outside parking contractors to oversee the use of the communal car park. However, the parking contractor has insisted on a yearly charge for the issuing of permits. With regard to the advise already received on this matter, am I correct in thinking that I do not need a permit, my tenancy agreement has not changed. Thank you for any advise.

Coupon-mad

barry22 wrote: »

Update: After a consultation with the residents, my landlord is planning to continue using outside parking contractors to oversee the use of the communal car park. However, the parking contractor has insisted on a yearly charge for the issuing of permits. With regard to the advise already received on this matter, am I correct in thinking that I do not need a permit, my tenancy agreement has not changed. Thank you for any advise.

Yes. I would read the threads by:

hairray

Daniel san

infernouk