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

95Rollers

Definitely. If it brings positive change that is the real win for everybody.

bergkamp

After missing a call from them yesterday,then me leaving a message , and them then leaving a message for me today, they said that they had enough information that they were collating and an update would be provided at the end of September...

Sandtree

Fruitcake said:

I've just helped my relative to make a complaint to the ICO about the DVLA releasing his personal data without checking that the PPC had landowner authority at the specific location.

I'll have a chat with him about this "no win no fee" company and see what he says. As long as there is no risk to him I think he will go for it.

Make sure you fully understand the "no win, no fee" rules as this doesn't automatically mean its risk free for him... often disbursements aren't covered so yes you dont pay the solicitor fee (hence no fee) but you do pay for the reports they paid for or the barrister they hired etc. 

Similarly if you discontinue the action then the "no fee" falls away because you are depriving them of the opportunity to claim expenses from the defendant unless they advise to discontinue. 

Sandtree

tommoCF said:

...sounds like there could be some costs in the event of a loss (though probably less if you purchase and ATE insurance policy..(+ who knows how much?)

That in itself is wrong because its the solicitors that buy the ATE insurance and are the legal beneficiaries of the policy. 

Fruitcake

My relative called in to see us today and has agreed to go for it with this company.

He received a PCN from VCS for stopping in a no-stopping zone at Bristol Airport, despite the fact the alleged event did not occur in any not part of the no-stopping zone, and VCS are not contracted to operate at that particular part of the airport.

He raised a complaint with the DVLA and included proof of the above, but they whitewashed it by saying, Reasonable Cause innit.
He has since raised a complaint with the ICO about his release of data.

I think he is just the sort of person these solicitors want to hear from.

Sandtree

Fruitcake said:

My relative called in to see us today and has agreed to go for it with this company.

He received a PCN from VCS for stopping in a no-stopping zone at Bristol Airport, despite the fact the alleged event did not occur in any not part of the no-stopping zone, and VCS are not contracted to operate at that particular part of the airport.

He raised a complaint with the DVLA and included proof of the above, but they whitewashed it by saying, Reasonable Cause innit.
He has since raised a complaint with the ICO about his release of data.

I think he is just the sort of person these solicitors want to hear from.

Yes, because the solicitors are the only ones guaranteed to make money out of this... your relative on the other hand could end up with a big bill from the solicitors.

Fruitcake

Sandtree said:

Fruitcake said:

My relative called in to see us today and has agreed to go for it with this company.

He received a PCN from VCS for stopping in a no-stopping zone at Bristol Airport, despite the fact the alleged event did not occur in any not part of the no-stopping zone, and VCS are not contracted to operate at that particular part of the airport.

He raised a complaint with the DVLA and included proof of the above, but they whitewashed it by saying, Reasonable Cause innit.
He has since raised a complaint with the ICO about his release of data.

I think he is just the sort of person these solicitors want to hear from.

Yes, because the solicitors are the only ones guaranteed to make money out of this... your relative on the other hand could end up with a big bill from the solicitors.

I appreciate your comments, and of course we will be reading the fine print on the contract very carefully.

henrik777

https://consumercreditlitigationanddebtcollection.wordpress.com/2016/02/09/no-win-no-fee-in-consumer-credit-claims/

That's a few years old but has some thoughts from the legal side of "no win no fee"

davemcc

Whilst the DVLA may be guilty of breaching the Data Protection laws, surely the main culpits are the Parking Charge companies themselves?

If they persist in obtaining Keepers' details for allegations of 'offences' that have been disproved in the courts then requesting Keeper information is in breach of at least one of the points set out in the guidelines;

Everyone responsible for using personal data has to follow strict rules called ‘data protection principles’. They must make sure the information is:

• used fairly, lawfully and transparently
• used for specified, explicit purposes
• used in a way that is adequate, relevant and limited to only what is necessary
• accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date
• kept for no longer than is necessary
• handled in a way that ensures appropriate security, including protection against unlawful or unauthorised processing, access, loss, destruction or damage

patient_dream

davemcc said:

Whilst the DVLA may be guilty of breaching the Data Protection laws, surely the main culpits are the Parking Charge companies themselves?

The parking industry is incestuous, they all come from the same bed and never change the sheets