Ticketed in space owned by me

Grizebeck

TNC are a back office processor for a lot of small parking firms who don't have their own kadoe access

UncleThomasCobley

Grizebeck said:

TNC are a back office processor for a lot of small parking firms who don't have their own kadoe access

How would their liability, if any, be linked to this?

patient_dream

I remember that sometime ago, UKPC got trashed in court over the same thing and they were banned by the court to enter the premises and had to pay costs ?

Who remembers this ???

LondonE5

Fruitcake said:

There is nothing stopping you sending the MA a LBC and the PPC, and claiming, say, £250 from each for the data breach. You could word it such that you won't go ahead with the claim if the MA instructs the PPC in writing, and you get proof from the PPC, to exempt your parking space and any vehicle parked thereon. Warn them that they have 30 days as per court pre-action protocol.
If that doesn't work, issue a court claim. I believe at the initial stage of a claim, it costs nothing. 

@Fruitcake .

Currently this is what I have received from P4Parking LTD.

I have had no written responses from the managing agent at all to any of my emails.  I think the representative there has her tail between her legs on this matter as her power trip came to an end....

------

"Dear Mr xxxxxx

Re: Parking Charge Notice Number xxxxxx (Vehicle: xxxxxxx)

Site: xxxxxxx Issue date: xx/xx/2023

Thank you for your email.

P4Parking have contacted xxxxx xxxxx Limited* and can confirm that Bay ## will no longer be included in our patrols. The above parking charge has now been cancelled.

Kind regards, P4Parking Admin"

*the managing agent for the building/car park.

------

So my LBC would have to purely be on the basis of the data protection act breach, unless I'm missing something?

It does anger me that they don't have the balls to have a person's name at the bottom of their correspondence.

Umkomaas

It does anger me that they don't have the balls to have a person's name at the bottom of their correspondence

Even when PPCs do, it's often a made up name. 

Great fight back of yours, impressed with your tenacity. Keep it going with what you have planned to complete. 

LondonE5

Umkomaas said:

It does anger me that they don't have the balls to have a person's name at the bottom of their correspondence

Even when PPCs do, it's often a made up name. 

Great fight back of yours, impressed with your tenacity. Keep it going with what you have planned to complete. 

Thank you. I'll be honest and say it isn't about the money but the principle.  I love the idea of flipping this around and taking them to court. Also more legal precedent in the world will help future potential victims.

These people are basic bullies, and how we treat each other matters.

I am very thankful for the kind people on here with the advice, and it's my intention to donate any compensation I might win to charity.

Fruitcake

That's a good result, but as I said, there is nothing stopping you from sending the MA and P4P an LBC for the data breach. It will cost you nothing, and will sharpen their minds ... perhaps.
If they don't pay, you have six years to initiate a claim. You could wait to see if you are ticketed again, in which case you could issue a claim without further notice once the 30 days from the issue date of the LBC has passed.

You should in any case still complain to the DVLA and DVLA KADOE team and your MP. Someone has been operating a for-profit business on your land without your permission, and the DVLA have given (sold) your personal data in breach of the DPA and GDPR without carrying out due diligence.
You should also be demanding that the PPC are sanctioned for obtaining and processing your personal data without just cause, on land that they do not own nor on land where they have a contract with or flowing from the landowner. 

Half_way

Earlier you said something about someone on a power trip refusing to help
 Some sites infested with unregulated PPCs operate something called self ticketing, this is where a busybody issues tickets themselves, and it has been reported that they can get a bonus for each ticket issued.

If you are going for a complaint to the management company you should also include this person on the power trip.
 If looking at GDPR that person should be reminded that there is an element of personal liability in  GDPR where an individual can be held liable as well as or instead of the company/ organisation they work for

LondonE5

Half_way said:

Earlier you said something about someone on a power trip refusing to help
 Some sites infested with unregulated PPCs operate something called self ticketing, this is where a busybody issues tickets themselves, and it has been reported that they can get a bonus for each ticket issued.

If you are going for a complaint to the management company you should also include this person on the power trip.
 If looking at GDPR that person should be reminded that there is an element of personal liability in  GDPR where an individual can be held liable as well as or instead of the company/ organisation they work for

That’s great if I can also implicate the individual concerned. Noted and will think how to include in my LBC.

Half_way

with regards to the lbc, or may be wise to start with a letter of complaint detailing the complaints first, and what you want then to do, then if you are prepared to go for a lBC , as far as i know a full on gdpr claim is a high bar to achieve and you may need further advice if you want to have a better chance of being  successful