DVLA MISUSE OF PERSONAL DATA UNDER GDPR - GROUP ACTION - NO WIN, NO FEE

bargepole

Coupon-mad said:

Dunno about any of you, but when my data was provided to the DVLA when I bought my current motor, it was done by the car trader online in front of us as we took the keys, and off we went.

There was no opportunity for the DVLA to tell me when accepting and storing my data as the new keeper (on the date of sale) that my data would be handed to third parties.  I certainly saw nothing to tell me this nor agreed.

If it arrived in due course in a cover letter with the new logbook, not only was that not prominently drawn to my attention but it comes too late and gives new keepers no option. New logbooks take months to arrive these days.

Advising this in small print too late (after the event of storing my data) if they did ever advise me, isn't good enough.

Wonder if @bargepole has had this update and thinks the same as me, that it is utter rubbish that new keepers are told in a timely fashion how their data will be shared and who with.  Despite doing what I do here, I can honestly say I've never read any such thing from the DVLA.

It's actually mentioned in the logbook (V5C) at the bottom right of the page, that the DVLA may share the data with third parties, and there is no provision for keepers to opt out of that. As said, this is too late, because the V5C doesn't arrive until several days after the purchase of a vehicle.

A while ago, I did some research into how other countries deal with this issue. Very few other countries have PPCs at all, and of those which do, for example Republic of Ireland, Australia and USA, their Governments do not sell private data to third party commercial firms. It seems that the UK is alone in this, and even more scandalous that certain individuals (no names mentioned) are getting substantial annual bonuses based on the volume of data sold.

Voyeurmse

I sent dvla a SAR.  There was nothing requested yet TNC said it was obtained from dvla.   Someone is telling porkies…hmmm?

Trainerman

Coupon-mad said:

Dunno about any of you, but when my data was provided to the DVLA when I bought my current motor, it was done by the car trader online in front of us as we took the keys, and off we went.


Wonder if @bargepole has had this update and thinks the same as me, that it is utter rubbish that new keepers are told in a timely fashion how their data will be shared and who with.  Despite doing what I do here, I can honestly say I've never read any such thing from the DVLA.

Being ancient, and an ex-motor sales person, I have seen many a log book ( even in the days when they really were a Log Book). What the DVLA have invented said there really is news to me !

I note Bargepole's comments, but really had not noticed this before

Coupon-mad

And ALL consumer notices have to be drawn to the consumer's attention prominently (as well as in a timely fashion when it is something like this that involves data handling).

A small print note on a late-served V5C (which currently sometimes take weeks/months to be returned by the failing DVLA) about something as onerous as the fact the DVLA sell data to a rogue industry and the keeper has no choice, doesn't meet that test.  No drivers/keepers are aware of this or have agreed to it.

Did the DVLA forget about the CRA 2015, just as the parking industry did?  They all seem to have assumed 'that law doesn't apply to us'.

Think about it:

PPCs have to put a GDPR notice at the entrance of car parks these days, so people (supposedly) are informed BEFORE they enter a car park, how the images/data will be used.

DVLA are hiding it in small print served weeks later on a document that a typical keeper has no cause to read in depth, except to check that the dates and details are right.  If the DVLA wanted to make this crystal clear  (which the law says they must) they'd have to have a system that sends an immediate alert to the new keeper the minute the keeper data is changed over.

Could easily be done by an email alert, if they could be bothered to gather an email as part of the new keeper data and set up an auto-alert to tell new keepers 'we've got your data, we will now process it and this is how we'll use it'.  

Of course, that's only the tip of this iceberg.  The main issue is that DVLA are giving out keeper data to rogues, on a nod and a wink with zero checks for 'reasonable cause', just because they use the Trojan Horse of rocking up wearing the right BPA or IPC 'hat'. 

And we all know how damn pally the DVLA and the Trade Bodies are.

IMHO, the DVLA are so far in the wrong direction they have completely lost sight that their first duty is to the keepers whose data they hold, not to their BPA and IPC mates they meet every week for an 'update'.

Even with those weekly meetings the BPA still forgot (for four whole months) to tell the DVLA about the significant fact that Wing parking had left the BPA AOS. Finally mentioned by chance during a chat, so the FOI from the DVLA told us.

The whole set up is far too much based on assumption and letting rogue firms get data under the radar, because DVLA doesn't appear to even have a radar.  They just leave all that stuff to the Trade Bodies.

Umkomaas

Hopefully Keller Lenkner can bring some sense into all this. 

patient_dream

Coupon-mad said:

The whole set up is far too much based on assumption and letting rogue firms get data under the radar, because DVLA doesn't appear to even have a radar.  They just leave all that stuff to the Trade Bodies.

Remember it took 20 years, trillions of dollars, and 4  U.S. presidents to replace the Taliban with the Taliban.

My tolerance for idiots is extremely low these days. I used to have some immunity built up, but obviously there's a new strain out there.

faborson1964

so basically we don't have the chance to contest the breach of data! they all are part of a trade that has been approved by the DVLA!!

we cant prove their parking machine failed, they hide behind breach of contract even if we paid for the parking time, the appeal body is 90% on their side and now official govt body pat on their head...

....day after day we get lubricated further wide.

Voyeurmse

Note Keller Lenkner UK is changing its name to Keller Postman UK from 04 July.  

Cardriver45

I just received an email from Kelly  Lenker to say they are dropping the case.

The claim against the DVLA was, until very recently, based solely on our understanding that in releasing your details to car parking companies to allow them to issue a PCN, the DVLA was in contravention of the UK GDPR and Data Protection Act and therefore you were entitled to make a claim.  

 

We received advice from a specialist QC barrister which supported this position.  

 

Having gathered more than 500 claimants and reviewing thousands of parking tickets, we sent a letter of Claim to the DVLA on 13 April 2022 which set out the basis for the claim.  

 

On 23 May, the DVLA responded to our letter denying that they were acting in breach of GDPR; they consider that they are entitled to share driver details with parking companies under S27 (1)(e) of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002 which reads: 

 

27.—(1) The Secretary of State may make any particulars contained in the register available for use -  

(e) by any person who can show to the satisfaction of the Secretary of State that he has reasonable cause for wanting the particulars to be made available to him. 

(“The Register” refers to the register of vehicle ownership kept by the DVLA) 

 

Subsequently, on 13 June the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), which is responsible for upholding the data rights of the public, issued an “opinion” in which it set out that by providing driver details to parking companies the DVLA was not breaching GDPR. The opinion can be found here:  dvla-opinion-20220613.pdf (ico.org.uk). This opinion reiterates the content of the DVLA’s denial and therefore in essence the ICO supports their position.  

 

We have also taken advice from two additional QC barristers who share the view that this claim does not have good prospects of success.  

 

For these reasons, we have decided not to progress this claim any further and will now take steps to close your file.  

 An alternative claim 

 

We are now running a separate, and different, claim against the DVLA.  

 

This claim involves instances where parking tickets ought not to have been issued, but DVLA shared driver details regardless; some examples of this are: 

 

• Client drove into a car park where there were no spaces available, left, but received a ticket 
• Client displayed a “blue badge” but received a ticket (NB: we are aware some private car parks still require you to pay and display even if you display a blue badge so we will need to investigate the individual circumstances carefully). 
• Client purchased and displayed a valid parking ticket, but received a ticket. 
• Client had a valid permit, but received a ticket. 
• Ticket machine was broken and there was no other means to pay (i.e. no phone number provided) 
• Client received a fine for a vehicle which doesn’t belong to them (often where a wrong registration number has been recorded by the parking company leading the wrong details to be sought from DVLA).  

 

The rationale for this alternative claim is that the parking company does not have “reasonable cause” for wanting the details of the driver/owner of the vehicle and therefore cannot satisfy s27(1)(e) of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002, which the DVLA currently relies upon.  

 

Where you have previously provided information regarding your parking charge that fits into the above categories, we will confirm to you directly. 

 

If we have not had sufficient detail from you previously about the circumstances of your parking ticket(s) then we will write to you to close your claim. If you think that you fit into the new category of claim please let us know, otherwise your claim will be closed. 

 

Coupon-mad

Interesting update.  I'm not surprised. Thanks!