PCN issued on a private, unadopted road

twhitehousescat

jackRlnd wrote: »

I replied with my V5C and original PCN but they are still insisting on items from List A and B from the original request.

At this point shall I just forget about this data request as it's likely to go to court anyway?

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=76240820&postcount=51

Coupon-mad

Report them to the ICO for their excessive requirements to deliberately create obstacles to consumers, to prevent a SAR.

Do that online and upload the proof. You need the data and have more than shown enough to prove who you are.

steve1500

There is no definitive list of what is required as proof of ID.

As already pointed out photo ID is a complete and utter joke unless the person is making the request in person

The ICO has made it perfectly clear that the production of ID should not be onerous.

One of the examples given if the Data Controller already has a relationship with the Data Subject, that should suffice.

That list is the Government's list

jackRlnd

thanks for the advice. I will fill out a form with the ICO later. Just tried and the website keeps timing out

nosferatu1001

Yes
State that they are required by the ICO to NOT make this process onerous, and as you already have a relationship with them then no further identification at all is required.

THeir deadline is X and if they insist on obstructing this legal right and fail to provide your data by the deadline, you will raise a furthe rcomplaint to the ICO, and will reserve the right to all legal remedies including suing them for damages.

jackRlnd

as expected they replied with the following:

Thank you for your feedback on our data subject request process.



We have an obligation under data protection legislation and DVLA rules to protect personal data from unauthorised disclosure. The law also requires us to take measures to verify a requestors identity.



You probably see news items or have heard of people having their identity stolen. This can be done by a third-party posing as someone and gathering pieces of data about a person from multiple sources.



That is why it is so important for us to follow our procedures.

Was thinking of responding with this:

I appreciate the response but this does not change the fact that there already exists a relationship between us via way of the PCN. I have provided you with proof of address by way of the V5C which also confirms the vehicle in question.
Your requirement for a photo ID is unwarranted as you have nothing to compare photo likeness to to confirm the authenticity.
I understand your need to follow your procedures but you have sufficient documentation whereby the ICO would be satisfied that your needless refusal to comply with the data request is an obstruction of my legal right. As such I have raised a further complaint and will keep doing so until my request is met.

Please note that there are three other PCNs issued to the vehicle in question, all of which clearly show a valid parking permit.

thoughts?

Redx

no problem with your reply , but I would also attach another copy of this V5C plus a redacted copy of a utility bill showing the current name , address and date, which is 2 forms of ID

give them 7 days to reply or an ICO complaint will be submitted or resubmitted

jackRlnd

I've now received a Claim Form and filed an AOS via the MCOL get an extra 14 days to get my defense ready.

I am however a bit confused as to what I should!be putting in my defense. I've had a look at bargepole's post!but am not entirely sure it applies to me.

If I could quickly provide an outline:
1. I live on a private road and the development!opposite contracted PPC to manage the parking outside!their!property.
2. They issued residents in the surrounding area permits to be used, some permanent and some temporary. I have a temporary permit (for tradesmen, visitors etc)
3. Had contractors around for a while and at times let them park in my driveway for convenience and had my car parked on the other side of the road with the permit displayed.
4. My original post in this thread doesn't mention the permits as the photo in the PCN in question clearly shows no visible permit. Could be the driver forgot to palce it on the dash or it slipped off

For my defense, should I be bothering to bring up permits? I have received 4 other PCNs where the permit is visible or the picture taken was so far away it's impossible to see anything and in my appeals I attached a close up photo of the permit.

If the other PCN's can be reviewed at the same hearing and shown to be voided due to the valid permit on display, would that hold any weight to the arguing against PCN in question or would they try and claim that it's a visitor's permit and not for use for a resident.

If the permits are irrelevant to this particular PCN should I stick with my defense of failure to follow all the conditions for Keeper Liability to apply, i.e. the car was not parked on 'relevant land' as the public has full use of the road all through the year and thus by common law deemed a highway.

I'm guessing since I already filed an AOS, I can't just pay the amount should this start looking unwinnable?

KeithP

What is the Issue Date on your County Court Claim Form?

jackRlnd

7/11/2019, so from the MCOL advice pdf, I assume I have 33 days until my defence must be submitted?