CST letters' forum group thread

beamerguy

All ok now and I like what Sir Dance is doing now

Frustated257

Can we use the GDPR Right to Erasure to get CST to delete our personal data?

I received a standard CST letter (ie instructed by their client Debt Recovery Plus, as agent for Initial Parking blah blah). 

So I challenged that I have no contract with DRP (both a complaint to CST, and a SAR request to delete my data).

Their reply simply states "we and our client have a legitimate interest...." and lists the client as Initial Parking.

This seems to suggest that they are acting for both DRP and Initial Parking.  Is this legal?

If they are instructed by DRP (who have no contract with me) then surely they have no legitimate interest to hold my data?

Or does the "acting as agent for Initial Parking" give them some legal basis?

Thanks

beamerguy

Frustated257 said:

Can we use the GDPR Right to Erasure to get CST to delete our personal data?

I received a standard CST letter (ie  as agent for Initial Parking blah blah). 

So I challenged that I have no contract with DRP (both a complaint to CST, and a SAR request to delete my data).

Their reply simply states "we and our client have a legitimate interest...." and lists the client as Initial Parking.

This seems to suggest that they are acting for both DRP and Initial Parking.  Is this legal?

If they are instructed by DRP (who have no contract with me) then surely they have no legitimate interest to hold my data?

Or does the "acting as agent for Initial Parking" give them some legal basis?

Thanks

Do CST actually know what they are doing ????   very much doubt it.

Maybe ask CST why they told a blatant lie by saying .... instructed by their client Debt Recovery Plus,.
All good CST rubbish to complain to the SRA about and to show in court

DRP COULD NOT INSTRUCT A FLY WITH ALL IT'S LEGS BROKEN .. CIRCUS CLOWNS

Umkomaas

This seems to suggest that they are acting for both DRP and Initial Parking.  Is this legal?

I'd ask that on a legal facing forum like LegalBeagles where lots of legally qualified people contribute. Parking might be at the root of it, but your question is not parking related per se. 

nathd91

Hi guys, 

I am another victim of CST law LBC! 

Background; 

3 years ago I got caught out in the ridiculous McDonald’s/Starbucks car park at Stansted (for parking in the wrong car park and walking to McDonald’s apparently). 

I stupidly ignored the letter that they sent to the registered owner of the vehicle and I have received very little since - I haven’t heard anything in over a year or so. 

Anyway, the original PCN was issued 3 months after the alleged offence, they do not know who the driver at the time is etc etc. 

Any advice on the below would be great, I see people have had an issue when CST law is acting on behalf of DRP. But it seems my letter shows them acting on behalf of the parking company, Met parking.

thank you

beamerguy

Welcome to the world of the CST scam.

NOTE:   The claim is for £170 ?    The ticket would have been £100, the scam is the added £70.
As this is a letter before claim, you need to reply.
You deny any debt and ask for their legal authority to add £70.  They have none, they know it and it's abuse of process.  This question has been asked many times and they ignore.

CST are mug hunting at present and chasing old tickets because parking companies are in dire straights due to covid ...... that area in Stanstead is a well known honey trap, no more it's now just a plain old drive thru, no parking.  So you understand why

CST have mail bombed 1000's of these letters looking for mugs, if they took everyone to court, it would take years.  

CST are wasting your time, return the favour to MET and SAR them for the information they hold on you ..... for future reference.

Understand about abuse of process by looking at this thread
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6103933/abuse-of-process-thread-part-2/p1?new=1

Take note of the first headed EXCEL v WILKINSON

Do ask CST for their legal authority, it will probably be the last you hear

D_P_Dance

Send this to CST and invite them to comment.  When/if they reply copy it to the SRA

https://www.sra.org.uk/

Excel v Wilkinson

At the Bradford County Court, District Judge Claire Jackson (now HHJ Jackson, a Specialist Civil Circuit Judge) decided to hear a 'test case' a few months ago, where £60 had been added to a parking charge despite Judges up and down the country repeatedly disallowing that sum and warning parking firms not to waste court time with such spurious claims.   That case was Excel v Wilkinson: G4QZ465V, heard in July 2020 and leave to appeal was refused and that route was not pursued.  The Judge concluded that such claims are proceedings with 'an improper collateral purpose'.   This Judge - and others who have since copied her words and struck dozens of cases out in late 2020 and into 2021 - went into significant detail and concluded that parking operators (such as this Claimant) are seeking to circumvent CPR 27.14 as well as breaching the Consumer Rights Act 2015.   DJ Hickinbottom has recently struck more cases out in that court area, stating: ''I find that striking out this claim is the only appropriate manner in which the disapproval of the court can be shown''.

nathd91

Thank you both for the help, it is much appreciated! 

If I send a letter without sending their designated form back within the 30 days, are they likely to take further action or respond to my letter prior? 

Thank you

Umkomaas

nathd91 said:

Thank you both for the help, it is much appreciated! 

If I send a letter without sending their designated form back within the 30 days, are they likely to take further action or respond to my letter prior? 

Thank you

To whom does the CST letter require you make payment of the £170 - it will tell you on the reverse side. 

nathd91

Umkomaas said:

nathd91 said:

Thank you both for the help, it is much appreciated! 

If I send a letter without sending their designated form back within the 30 days, are they likely to take further action or respond to my letter prior? 

Thank you

To whom does the CST letter require you make payment of the £170 - it will tell you on the reverse side. 

Umkomaas said:

nathd91 said:

Thank you both for the help, it is much appreciated! 

If I send a letter without sending their designated form back within the 30 days, are they likely to take further action or respond to my letter prior? 

Thank you

To whom does the CST letter require you make payment of the £170 - it will tell you on the reverse side. 

Ah it does look like DRP..