A

Coupon-mad

Daver1978 said:

This will probably end up in court 8 times then.

No it won't.  Did you read the link I gave you and missed the fact they CAN'T?

Coupon-mad

Which the defendant would then tell the court about (repeatedly) until they are consolidated into one hearing, later down the line, or preferably struck out.

But by responding at LBC stage your wife can stop them all dead because there is already a 'live' claim.  They are too late.  Doesn't matter if it's a different solicitor.

Your wife will (at LBC stage) respond citing the Henderson/cause of action estoppel argument back at the solicitors who send each LBC, telling them that the live claim xxxxxxx will determine the issues and their client is too late to try for a second bite of the cherry.

Their client can see this is the same data subject, same name and address and exact same cash-cow location where they are milking authorised drivers of vast sums and making motorists' lives a misery.  They had the opportunity to present their whole claim and they didn't, which is their loss.  A second claim would be an abuse of process caused by their own negligent data handling and so they must cease and desist or she will counterclaim for damages for distress and data abuse.

Boat_to_Bolivia

[Deleted User] said:

Yes I read It. Also read further on the thread and the person still received 2 ccbc forms as a result.

You need to trust what CM is telling you. She knows the scams of these PPC's inside out and you will find no better advice anywhere. If CM says they can't take your wife to court 8 times, then you'd be best to take her word for it.

Coupon-mad

Daver1978 said:

Found another case on MSE and can now see its only when the judge is aware of what's happening that the multiple case is advantage to my wife's case.

No, it is also possible to shut them up at LBC stage, trust me, I've done it.

The mistake people make is letting it get to a claim and not fighting it robustly at LBC stage.

You are not at that stage.  Writing to ZZPS is futile!

Le_Kirk

[Deleted User] said:

Sorry for all the questions, as mentioned previously this is new to me. 

[Deleted User] said:

It's just a little overwhelming.

You don't have to have a new post every time you think of something that is connected to a previous thought, you have been on the forum long enough to be able to edit your posts.  Look for the little gear wheel at the top right of your post, click on it and you should see an EDIT. 

[Deleted User]

Hi All,
I have received SARS info from CEL in relation to parking tickets for snap fitness. The confirmation authority is for a hotel a hotel car park and not the gym car park. The sign and car park diagram are not from the gym. Can this be used as I have already sent my wife's defence.
Thanks in advance

Le_Kirk

I hope your wife sent her defence (or you sent it in her name), however data from the SAR is more useful at Witness Statement stage as it can be used to back up and support what is in your wife's defence.

[Deleted User]

Hi Le-Kirk
Yes, my wife's defence has been sent and received by ccbc. 
I'm currently writing my wife's WS, just need a few photos of signage in car park, so I can complete her witness statement.
I will post WS hopefully some point next week. Hopefully this will be critiqued and point out my mistakes which im sure there will be some.

Thanks again, please excuse all my questions.

[Deleted User]

My wife has received the following email from DCBL with DQ attached. I will assume this again should be ignored and await further correspondence from the court.

Boat_to_Bolivia

You are correct.