**Mis-sold car **. Sold car that turns out to have been involved in accident and repaired poorly

NSG666

ontheroad1970 said:

k3lvc said:

NSG666 said:

Th02msn said:

NSG666 said:

Write to the previous keepers to ask where the repairs were carried out - if they tell you at least you'll have proof that the car had been repaired prior to you buying it.

Thanks for commenting. Unfortunately - it would be near impossible to get the previous keepers details with data protection.

Ah things must have changed as the name and address of the previous keeper used to be on your V5 - I once used it to write to the previous keeper to ask about service history but that must have been 2015.

It has changed - hence why I always ask to see V5 to compare details with car and take some details - once it's gone to DVLA you've no access to previous details

It is illegal to keep people's details on any kind of database without their consent.  The law doesn't differentiate as to commercial or private.  If you contacted me enquiring about a car I'd sold to a dealer you would get short shrift and no cooperation.  If I wanted tyre kickers calling, I'd take the premium of a private sale.

Thanks for that - you've given me an excellent excuse not to send any Christmas cards!

k3lvc

ontheroad1970 said:

k3lvc said:

NSG666 said:

Th02msn said:

NSG666 said:

Write to the previous keepers to ask where the repairs were carried out - if they tell you at least you'll have proof that the car had been repaired prior to you buying it.

Thanks for commenting. Unfortunately - it would be near impossible to get the previous keepers details with data protection.

Ah things must have changed as the name and address of the previous keeper used to be on your V5 - I once used it to write to the previous keeper to ask about service history but that must have been 2015.

It has changed - hence why I always ask to see V5 to compare details with car and take some details - once it's gone to DVLA you've no access to previous details

It is illegal to keep people's details on any kind of database without their consent.  The law doesn't differentiate as to commercial or private.  If you contacted me enquiring about a car I'd sold to a dealer you would get short shrift and no cooperation.  If I wanted tyre kickers calling, I'd take the premium of a private sale.

Before claiming 'illegal' for individuals would you like to share the specific legislation (and definition of a database)

Obviously it's your right to ignore/give short shrift but the previous owner who'd lost their phone down the side of the back seats of a car I purchased was more than happy to have it back

Reginald74

GDPR certainly does apply to individuals as well as companies but article 2 of the GDPR states that the GDPR doesn't apply to a "purely personal or household activity."

It depends whether this situation would count as that.  Seems a grey area to me.

Sandtree

Reginald74 said:

GDPR certainly does apply to individuals as well as companies but article 2 of the GDPR states that the GDPR doesn't apply to a "purely personal or household activity."

It depends whether this situation would count as that.  Seems a grey area to me.

Neighbour wins privacy row over smart doorbell and cameras - BBC News

The judge stated the cameras, purely personal, breached both the DPA and GDPR 

Reginald74

Sandtree said:

Reginald74 said:

GDPR certainly does apply to individuals as well as companies but article 2 of the GDPR states that the GDPR doesn't apply to a "purely personal or household activity."

It depends whether this situation would count as that.  Seems a grey area to me.

Neighbour wins privacy row over smart doorbell and cameras - BBC News

The judge stated the cameras, purely personal, breached both the DPA and GDPR 

He may have considered them personal but they were recording others without their consent, meaning he was wrong and they did not fall under 'personal' as indicated by article 2. That doesn't tell us whether this does or not.

troffasky

Sandtree said:

Neighbour wins privacy row over smart doorbell and cameras - BBC News

The judge stated the cameras, purely personal, breached both the DPA and GDPR 

I don't think it's relevant. Automatically collecting audio and video of your neighbour's property is nothing like taking a single picture of a document. Thankfully the law seems to be able to discriminate between the two types of data collection.

rca779

If you want to try and contact the previous owner, check the service history. Old invoices will probably at least have their name and possbily even a contact number or so

Sandtree

troffasky said:

Sandtree said:

Neighbour wins privacy row over smart doorbell and cameras - BBC News

The judge stated the cameras, purely personal, breached both the DPA and GDPR 

I don't think it's relevant. Automatically collecting audio and video of your neighbour's property is nothing like taking a single picture of a document. Thankfully the law seems to be able to discriminate between the two types of data collection.

Was intended to show that there is an automatic avoidance of GDPR regs just because you state its for personal use rather than definitive proof that its an issue.

The DVLA has taken the action to remove the previous keepers details, this would have cost them IT development costs etc and so it won't have been done out of a whim. As the statement was to take the photo of the old V5 because you wont otherwise get the data there is a clear intention to store the data knowing the DVLA feel its no longer appropriate to be shared. I am not a data privacy expert despite the number of damned meetings I've had on GDPR but it certainly isnt a slam dunk that its perfectly acceptable to do so in my mind. 

Jenni_D

It's a risk/reward calculation ... what's the risk of someone complaining/suing the photo taker under GDPR vs the reward of the taker having pertinent details "just in case"? I imagine that the risk is very low.

Is it a GDPR breach? Probably.
Would anything come of it? Unlikely.

Jumblebumble

ontheroad1970 said:

k3lvc said:

NSG666 said:

Th02msn said:

NSG666 said:

Write to the previous keepers to ask where the repairs were carried out - if they tell you at least you'll have proof that the car had been repaired prior to you buying it.

Thanks for commenting. Unfortunately - it would be near impossible to get the previous keepers details with data protection.

Ah things must have changed as the name and address of the previous keeper used to be on your V5 - I once used it to write to the previous keeper to ask about service history but that must have been 2015.

It has changed - hence why I always ask to see V5 to compare details with car and take some details - once it's gone to DVLA you've no access to previous details

It is illegal to keep people's details on any kind of database without their consent.  The law doesn't differentiate as to commercial or private.  If you contacted me enquiring about a car I'd sold to a dealer you would get short shrift and no cooperation.  If I wanted tyre kickers calling, I'd take the premium of a private sale.

Really
How come the Credit Reference agencies keep records of bankruptcies and CCJs then ?
How about private parking companies ?
I am sure no one consented to either of these  doing so.