Not the Keeper nor the Driver

Grizebeck

It's good..!!

1505grandad

"I’ve done a proof read, corrected some errors and now after lots of renumbering, it’s ready to go"

Just checking  -  has this been corrected  -  seems to be no b) and the unnumbered para is a copy of a)?

34.  To simplify the counterclaim and to assist the court in determining the issue without complicated calculations, it is set - notwithstanding which allegation(s) succeed - at a single sum in compensation at the lowest end of established guidance in the Vento bands, pursuant to the following: 

·         a) damages for distress caused by the Claimants’ breach of statutory duties under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and misleading actions within the meaning of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, as amended by the Consumer Protection (Amendment) Regulations 2014 (“the Regulations”);  

·         c) damages for distress caused by breach of statutory duty under the Data Protection Act 2018 and General Data Protection Regulation ('the GDPR');

Damages for distress caused by the Claimants’ breach of statutory duties under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and misleading actions within the meaning of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, as amended by the Consumer Protection Regulations (Amendment) Regulations 2014 (“the Regulations”):

Pullmyfinger88

Thanks @1505grandad

I’d spotted that there was no B, but missed the duplicate paragraph 🤣 thank-you.

Not_A_Hope

The proper course of action was to cancel the PCN but instead, the Claimant's hostile and flippant correspondence and threats of court action have been particularly unwelcome when I am a single parent who is very busy working and raising my daughter.

Just a minor point in para 45. Your defence should be written in the third person. So instead of using I, state you are the defendant who is a single parent …….

Pullmyfinger88

Thanks @Not_A_Hope 👍 it’s not easy to write in the 3rd person 🙈 it’s corrected

Coupon-mad

Here's another successful counterclaim from this year, worth you reading as it won on data abuse under the DPA and GDPR:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/79870626/#Comment_79870626

LightFlare

Pullmyfinger88 said:

sorry @Coupon-mad , I didn’t see your message.

No, they’re not saying that, they’re just being “smart” and obstructive I think. I’ve mentioned it in my counter claim along with this trace that returned a “second address”. I did provide them with a redacted utility bill and a copy of their claim paperwork as suggested but they aren’t having it. 

Good evening, 

If you are claiming that we have the wrong person then we cannot provide you with any further information. 

If you are stating that the vehicle whose image is on the Notice to Keeper along with the details provided by the DVLA is not your vehicle then we will not continue correspondence with you. 

We can only legally provide a SAR to either the driver of the vehicle or the registered keeper.

We received the details from the DVLA which provided your name and the address recorded at the DVLA. When we passed the unpaid parking charge to DCBL they would have carried out a trace and found the second address. 

As far as we are concerned the parking charge was issued lawfully in accordance with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and the parking charge will not be cancelled.

If you are not the person who is responsible for the parking charge it is your responsibility to discuss this with DCBL.

If you believe we have acted outside the law, then please contact the ICO. If we receive a request from them, we will provide them with all the information which we hold in relation to this parking charge which we would have released to the identified driver or registered keeper.

In relation to the request for ID verification of signature I can confirm that this is our method to confirm the identity of the person requesting the personal data which as previously discussed with the ICO is perfectly acceptable to confirm ID. 

In relation to the County Court Claim Form it is your option to provide evidence against the claim and if required submit a counterclaim. 

Regards 

Data Protection and Compliance Department

I Park Services Limited

PO Box 90

Cockermouth

CA13 3BA

Thats blatant rubbish.

If you request all information relating to your name - they must provide it

An SAR almost by definition is relating to the person requesting it:

"I Joe Bloggs request a copy of all information relating to myself that you hold"

Coupon-mad

Yes but it's better for the Counterclaim that they DIDN'T so the OP won't chase that up.

Pullmyfinger88

Thanks @Coupon-mad. I’ll give it a look. And yes, I gave both of them 2 chances and they poo pooed me. They’re only interested in making it difficult so you’ll pay aren’t they? It’s sooo distressing. 😞😞

@LightFlare, we know it’s rubbish dont we? 🙈 they’re so hard faced but it doesn’t matter now because I filed my defence & counterclaim this morning and received an acknowledgment from CCBC. Hopefully a judge is going to inform them of the error of their ways now 💪 

Pullmyfinger88

Coupon-mad said:

Here's another successful counterclaim from this year, worth you reading as it won on data abuse under the DPA and GDPR:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/79870626/#Comment_79870626

Wow!!! He/she didn’t follow any of the rules and still won 🙈🙈 there’s hope for me yet.