Excel PCN NTK - Now a Default CCJ

waamo

I wouldn't put anything on it. If they do launch legal proceedings then you want to show you have been reasonable and tried to prevent it.

Marking without prejudice means a judge doesn't get to see it and I would want that seen.

abedegno

waamo wrote: »

I wouldn't put anything on it. If they do launch legal proceedings then you want to show you have been reasonable and tried to prevent it.

Marking without prejudice means a judge doesn't get to see it and I would want that seen.

Thanks - that's what I thought.

Coupon-mad

I agree, don't state 'without prejudice'.

abedegno

All quiet from Excel - 21 days has passed and no further correspondence, but I think I would be foolish to believe my fight is over...

Should I now follow-up with my threat, and notify the ICO or wait and see what further correspondence I receive?

Umkomaas

If you've threatened to do something you should carry it out - otherwise it's an empty threat, and the PPC will soon realise that. Any future threats will be regarded as empty too.
The ICO take ages to respond, so any delay in your complaint to the ICO just kicks the can further down the road.

If you mean business - just do it.

nosferatu1001

Oh come on, you've not said you'll part the Irish Sea

You're making s simple complaint to the ico. Online. About 15 minutes work.

abedegno

Complaint made to ICO - we'll see what happens next...

abedegno

Is there anyone else I should complain to - I was thinking DVLA but given other posts on here regarding their response to Excel's non-compliant NtD I'm not sure it's worth it.

However, reading the Kadoe contract I can see Excel are technically not in compliance with D1.1 "The Parties shall comply with the requirements of the Data Protection Act 1998"

Thanks
Abe

Snakes_Belly

Just as a matter of interest how much batting back and forth did your IAS appeal go on for? I have to admit that if I had not been in such a hurry to appeal to the operator and read up more first I doubt I would have gone down this route. I was angry though and I didn't think it through. My IAS appeal is still on going but I am not optimistic. The operator does seem to be wasting their time on responding back and forth. So am I. It's like a game of tennis at the moment and I am not sure who has the advantage (probably IAS). I pity the adjudicator who gets this case.

abedegno

Hi Snakes,

I did A LOT of batting back and forth on the IAS appeal - pointing out mistakes in the 'evidence' that the operator was supplying, it became a bit of entertainment at one point to see how long I could string it out for before the operator gave up replying :-)

In hindsight, I wish I hadn't bothered with the IAS appeal but was advised to do so on another forum because of the unusual case (misconfigured online payment times).