LBC BW legal what should I do now?

Snipsnip

As Redx alludes to, TPS has been able to provide copies of original NtKs via a SAR request, in which case, provided the driver isn't identified, TPS would likely be on thin ice in court.

You’re right the driver has not been identified

Coupon-mad

From reading other TPS threads you will learn the most from this forum and it saves us a heck of a lot of repetition.

Search for Tito as your keyword and change the ADVANCED search to 'show results as POSTS'. If there was a windscreen PCN on the day? Tito hasn't shown it in the SAR, has he? Rhetorical question, please do the search and sped the weekend reading all the exact same threads as yours.

Redx

Snipsnip wrote: »

They sent me what they said ‘a comprehensive case history file, constituting a full copy of data’ which was the copy of PCN Final reminder, which just states my details, the vehicle, contravention date & time. No images & they also stated in the email that the location does not operate pay & display

So no windscreen NTD and no first contact NTK either

Email back another SAR and insist that the missing documents are returned forthwith

Chances are he hasn't got the missing items which is a killer blow for any case against the keeper, so don't just tell us what was included, because it's the missing items which are more important to your case

The reminder letter is probably missing any POFA wording etc

Snipsnip

Redx wrote: »

So no windscreen NTD and no first contact NTK either

Email back another SAR and insist that the missing documents are returned forthwith

Chances are he hasn't got the missing items which is a killer blow for any case against the keeper, so don't just tell us what was included, because it's the missing items which are more important to your case

The reminder letter is probably missing any POFA wording etc

Thank you! I have emailed the DPO again requesting for:
ALL letters/emails sent & received
A copy of the windscreen ticket issued on the day
A copy of the first notice to keeper

Is there anything else I should email BW again? (Since they denied my restriction of data processing and my case be put on hold)

Snipsnip

Coupon-mad wrote: »

From reading other TPS threads you will learn the most from this forum and it saves us a heck of a lot of repetition.

Search for Tito as your keyword and change the ADVANCED search to 'show results as POSTS'. If there was a windscreen PCN on the day? Tito hasn't shown it in the SAR, has he? Rhetorical question, please do the search and sped the weekend reading all the exact same threads as yours.

Thank you for the advice! I have read through a lot that are the same as mine, they all seem to be at the same stage as I am

Snipsnip

Hi all, update on my response from the DPO.
They replied saying that the notice to keeper was a copy of the first reminder & that they do not hold copies of the PCN as it was electronically received

Redx

so they do not have the original invoices and so their claim would be flawed due to the lack of paperwork (no windscreen notice and no original first contact NTK either)

if the driver has not been identified then the reminder wont have POFA listed either, plus it would have failed the timescales of pofa as well

so their lack of evidence is evidence for you , as I said previously

they snooze , they lose , eventually


I would report them to the ICO for not keeping the data safe and not being able to produce it when asked

Umkomaas

Redx wrote: »

so they do not have the original invoices and so their claim would be flawed due to the lack of paperwork (no windscreen notice and no original first contact NTK either)

if the driver has not been identified then the reminder wont have POFA listed either, plus it would have failed the timescales of pofa as well

so their lack of evidence is evidence for you , as I said previously

they snooze , they lose , eventually


I would report them to the ICO for not keeping the data safe and not being able to produce it when asked

^^ Do that, make Tito squirm ^^. :cool:

Coupon-mad

The NTK is never a copy of the windscreen PCN! These are not one and the same. Both documents must be produced.

They are entirely separate legal documents, tell the ICO, with separate definitions and wording required under the POFA 2012.

Remember the ICO does not know all this so you have to tell them, as they will ask Tito for his position and might misunderstand/be led up the garden path unless you quote the POFA.

Snipsnip

Coupon-mad wrote: »

The NTK is never a copy of the windscreen PCN! These are not one and the same. Both documents must be produced.

They are entirely separate legal documents, tell the ICO, with separate definitions and wording required under the POFA 2012.

Remember the ICO does not know all this so you have to tell them, as they will ask Tito for his position and might misunderstand/be led up the garden path unless you quote the POFA.

Sorry this might sound stupid but who is the ICO & how do I go about reporting to them? Also Is there any template of what I should be reporting to them I’m not very good at this stuff, do I just need to state they couldn’t provide documents I asked for?