DCB Legal for CP Plus re Road Chef / Moto PCNs – Advice on defence against Claim

Timeouts

RoadChef are proving they are not a worthy company to deal with.

A SAR for your data is THE LAW and RoadChef can be fined for breaking the law.

What is amazing is that RoadChef are putting their neck on the line all over a scammer operating in their car parks.

REPORT THEM TO THE ICO  ... THEY HAVE LESSONS TO LEARN

larry63

Umkomaas said:

What exactly did you ask for?  Was it just the standard SAR template that you used?

Ask the ICO for their view on RoadChef claiming total exemption from providing any personal information they hold about you. We're not the expert resource on subject access request minutiae, so do go to the ICO, the horse's mouth.

EDIT TO ADD

RoadChef are not 'legal professionals', so exactly what 'privilege' are they claiming - ask them?  Check out the criteria for 'legal privilege' before firing both barrels. Ask them are they involved in litigation against you. So, I'd go back to them to ask the above, then to require them to provide you your information in full or this will result in a complaint to the ICO.

Yes i only asked for the standard SAR Template.

I did go back and ask them to be exact as to what part of this section they are relying upon and got the answer as follows:

Having already identified below the exemption which precludes us from being able to provide the information you requested (where we do actually hold such information), we consider the basis set out in sub-paragraph (a) of the below-mentioned Paragraph 19 ‘Legal Professional Privilege’ exemption to be the more relevant.

Yours faithfully,

The Data Protection Team
on behalf of
Roadchef Ltd

Umkomaas

Report them to the ICO. They've had a chance to rethink their earlier reply to you, but aren't prepared to budge. See if they will spout the same to the ICO. 

Timeouts

Frankly, if that's what RoadChef thinks ?    let them get on with it.  Nobody but nobody can refuse a request for personal data ...... That is why the ICO have the power to fine those who do not comply.

YOU ARE ONLY ASKING FOR INFORMATION THEY HOLD ON YOU.

Pity that RoadCef are on track to alienate paying customers 
Surely RoadChef don't want this hassle over an unregulated parking company who farm car parks for money ?

And are RoadChef not interested in the retailers on site who probably pay very high rents ..... seems not

THIS IS A SEVERE ICO COMPLAINT

larry63

ICO Website states the follwoing if a SAR is not adhered to.

What should we do if we refuse to comply with a request?

If you refuse to comply with a request, you must inform the individual of:

1. the reasons why;
2. their right to make a complaint to the ICO; and
3. their ability to seek to enforce this right through the courts.

Not sure if they hit the target for 1,  "Reasons Why", by simply stating para 19 etc, but definately no 2 and 3 in any email. Roadchef maynot have done this as per the book even if they are allowed....

Timeouts

You are not asking RoadChef for anything other than your LEGAL right for information.

Copupon-mad summed it up in an earlier post

Unlike "HANCOCKS HALF HOUR" ..... The law is the law and RoadChef are not above the law ?

Umkomaas

larry63 said:

ICO Website states the follwoing if a SAR is not adhered to.

What should we do if we refuse to comply with a request?

If you refuse to comply with a request, you must inform the individual of:

1. the reasons why;
2. their right to make a complaint to the ICO; and
3. their ability to seek to enforce this right through the courts.

Not sure if they hit the target for 1,  "Reasons Why", by simply stating para 19 etc, but definately no 2 and 3 in any email. Roadchef maynot have done this as per the book even if they are allowed....

Add it all into your complaint to the ICO. They can't just make it up as they go along in attempting to fob you off. 

Coupon-mad

Your SAR is not something that Roadchef can refuse. Major ICO complaint attaching the email as well evidence and telling the ICO what you want Roadchef to do to resolve it.

larry63

Quick update

 

I have received the N180 and have completed as per the Newbie instructions:

 

·         A1 = NO to mediation (they want the whole amount, you want to pay them nothing, so no scope for mediation. This will not go against you)

·         B = fill in all the details, name, address, etc

·         C1 = YES to small claims track – this is the limited costs track for claims up to £10,000 in value

·         D1 = name of your local County Court – unless you are a Ltd company, the case files will be transferred there

·         D2 = NO to expert evidence (this relates to medical negligence cases and suchlike)

·         D3 = 1 witness (that’s you) (or more if you are going to get another person to provide a statement)

·         D4 = Put down the dates of any pre-booked holidays, NO to interpreter (unless you need one).

 

One strange aspect is i reviewed the MCO account, and it stated that

“Notification that the claim against you was discontinued was received on xx/xx/2021”

 

Yet, nearly two months later it now states

 

DQ sent to you on xx/08/2021

DQ filed by claimant on xx/08/2021

 

As the initial claim was for two PCNs, by two different service station operators, and one very quickly withdrew their claim by asking for it to be discontinued, it would seem the Notification of claim discontinued must of been wrongly noted by the courts, as it was only partly withdrawn (one of the PCNs).  Or is this something i can use in my future defence?

 

Additionally, as there is only one PCN being chased now, there has been nothing at all to suggest the value of the claim has been diminished, so does this void this claim and it needs to start again, or should something be sent to me to advise the amount of the claim has been adjusted?

 

Thanks All

Umkomaas

Call the court tomorrow. They are the people to answer your questions. Write down what you want to discuss before you call.