Britannia rejected Sar request

nosferatu1001

Complaint to the ICO
Include your correspondence and their letters back, point out they are refusing to provide your personally identifiable infomraiton in line with the DPA2018 , and believe they can charge for this as "additional" info

Mail Steve Clark as well. Point out one of their members is failing in their legal obligations, and this is likely under advice from BW Legal.

SEnd a FINAL NOTICE warning to Britannia, stating that unless they provide the information within 5 days, free of charge in line with their legal obligations under the GDPR, you will be forced to take lall legal remedies available to you, including court action. You have already made a complaint to the ICO, their continued refusal to meet theiir legal obligations will simply add to the complaint.

beamerguy

nosferatu1001 wrote: »

Mail Steve Clark as well. Point out one of their members is failing in their legal obligations, and this is likely under advice from BW Legal.

Nice to see you are of the same mind.

Very dangerous for Britannia

Mazzamonkey

So I didn’t report Britannia to Ico. I read the letter they sent again and it said that they had a month to respond and if I wanted to have any additional documents not covered by SAR I needed to pay £10

So i have been waiting for the SAR information but today I have received court papers. Can someone help me with what to do next? This seems crazy for what was a half hour free parking 2 years ago

beamerguy

Mazzamonkey wrote: »

So I didn’t report Britannia to Ico. I read the letter they sent again and it said that they had a month to respond and if I wanted to have any additional documents not covered by SAR I needed to pay £10

So i have been waiting for the SAR information but today I have received court papers. Can someone help me with what to do next? This seems crazy for what was a half hour free parking 2 years ago

Britannia has toned down their bad attitude about a SAR.

Nevertheless, they have 30 days to respond and provide you the evidence you need for their claim.

If they fail then you report Britannia to the ICO

Assume the court claim is from BWLegal.

Did you not receive a letter before claim from them, also providing proof of their claim and giving you 30 days to respond

KeithP

Mazzamonkey wrote: »

...today I have received court papers.

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

Did it come from the County Court Business Centre in Northampton, or from somewhere else?

Mazzamonkey

Hi there!

So I have spent a lot of time reading the newbies thread and other peoples’s Defence statements. I have just done the AOS online and would really appreciate it if someone can review my defence? The issue date on claim form was 8.2.19 Many thanks


1. The Defendant was the registered keeper of vehicle registration number XXXXXXX on the material date. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.

2. The Defendant asserts this claim is premature and in breach of the GDPR by unreasonably and unfairly processing data for a claim, before the Claimant has supplied the SAR data and information requested in good faith by the Defendant on 2 occasions after initially the claimant refused to comply.

3 Due to the sparseness of the particulars of this claim it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. However, it is denied that the Defendant, or any driver of the vehicle, entered into any contractual agreement with the Claimant, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

4. The facts of the matter are that the Defendant’s vehicle entered the car park at the Army and Navy. Where the most visible signage (fig1) stated 30 minutes parking is free of charge. The defendants vehicle remained in the car park for a short time. The NTK stayed that the vehicle was parked for 27 minutes stating that the contravention was ‘failure to make a valid payment’ however no payment is required for 30 minutes parking.

5. Iit is therefore strongly denied that the claimant's signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them. No where on any sign does it clearly state that a ticket is required at all times.

6. Accordingly, it is denied that the Defendant breached any of the Claimant's purported contractual terms, whether express, implied, or by conduct.

7.The Claimant is put to strict proof that it has sufficient interest in the land or that there are specific terms in its contract to bring an action on its own behalf. As a third party agent, the Claimant may not pursue any charge, unless specifically authorised by the principal. The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant does not have the authority to issue charges on this land in their own name, and that they have no right to bring any action regarding this claim.

8.The Defendant has the reasonable belief that the Claimant has not incurred £60 contractual costs to pursue the alleged debt, the defendant denies any interest is owing to the claimant. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, in Schedule 4, Para 4(5) states that the maximum sum that may be recovered from the keeper is the charge stated on the Notice to Keeper.

9i In summary, the Claimant's particulars disclose no legal basis for the sum claimed, the sum claimed is vastly inflated due to the addition of unspecified charges which the defendant asserts is a gross abuse of process and the Court is invited to dismiss the claim in its entirety.

Statement of Truth:

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true.
Statement of Truth:

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true.

KeithP

Mazzamonkey wrote: »

The issue date on claim form was 8.2.19

With a Claim Issue Date of 8th February, and having done the Acknowledgement of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Wednesday 13th March 2019 to file your Defence.

That's a month away - but it's a short month. Loads of time to produce a perfect Defence, but don't leave it to the very last minute.


When you are happy with the content, your Defence should be filed via email as suggested here:

Print your Defence.
1. Sign it and date it.
   
2. Scan the signed document back in and save it as a pdf.
   
3. Send that pdf as an email attachment to CCBCAQ@Justice.gov.uk
   
4. Just put the claim number and the word Defence in the email title, and in the body of the email something like 'Please find my Defence attached'.
   
5. Log into MCOL after a few days to see if the Claim is marked "defended". If not chase the CCBC until it is.
   
6. Do not be surprised to receive a copy of the Claimant's Directions Questionnaire, they are just trying to put you under pressure.
   
7. Wait for your DQ from the CCBC, or download one from the internet, and then re-read post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread to find out exactly what to do with it.

Mazzamonkey

Thanks Keith P

Is what I have drafted ok? Can I attach photos of signs to my defence and email them?

In regards to BWL trying to claim for an extra £60 which goes against what POFA says is this enough to therefore meant that they cannot try and make a claim against the registered keeper if they are relying on POFA? Is that how it works or have I got it completely wrong? I have checked the NTK and everything appears to comply with POFA. It’s all quite confusing!

Umkomaas

Evidence (like photos) comes later at Witness Statement stage. Photos don't go into a defence.

The £60 isn't PoFA related. It's an add-on connected with either legal or admin costs. Challenge it in the defence.

Redx

as above, your defence is only a set of words, nothing more, because at this moment there is no court allocated , so you cannot add evidence until the correct stage in this process, so study the process so you know what happens when , because BARGEPOLE posted those steps years ago


any addons like the £60 ARE NOT ALLOWED under the rules for small claims (CPR) , nothing to do with parking per se