Biting back with a vengeance

Coupon-mad

Not sure you can send paper court claims to Northampton? I thought they handled MCOL cases only and if you wanted to do it on paper (rather than via MCOL) it had to be via Salford, or are they now amalgamated offices?

ChirpyChicken

Coupon-mad said:

Not sure you can send paper court claims to Northampton? I thought they handled MCOL cases only and if you wanted to do it on paper (rather than via MCOL) it had to be via Salford, or are they now amalgamated offices?

Yes all amalgamated now 

GettingOnInYears

I'm busy redrafting and have really shortened the para 1-24 and 53 -70. I have eliminated a good bit of stuff that doesn't conform to CPR 16.4,
However to shorten some of the more applicable things I have simply mentioned them and referenced them to annexes and the same points in the witness statement. Would that be acceptable

GettingOnInYears

in cpr 16.4 does concise mean that instead of explanation there can be a reference to items already mentioned in the witness statement

Coupon-mad

The witness statement comes much much later.

doubledotcom

The PoC could easily be distilled down to a single page. Everything else that is waffled on about in the original can be left for WS and skeleton.

Why not use MCOL to submit the claim. You can submit the detailed PoC by post to arrive within 14 days of the claim. In MCOL just tick “Particulars to follow”. That will allow you to input up to 945 characters. Use the following for brief PoC in the webform:

Claim for damages for unlawful processing of personal data contrary to UK GDPR/DPA 2018. On 8 Feb 2025 at Castle Dene, no compliant entrance sign; nonetheless the Defendants obtained and used the Claimant’s DVLA keeper data. No reasonable cause; no lawful basis under Art 6(1)(f); breaches of Art 5(1)(a)–(b). Damages for distress £1,000, interest under s.69 County Courts Act 1984 from the date of DVLA access, and the issue fee. The Claimant will serve full Particulars of Claim within 14 days of service of the claim form.

Then you could simply post a single page, more detailed PoC, first class with a free certificate of posting, in case they try to rebut the presumption of delivery.

1. The Claimant received a Parking Charge Notice dated 8 February 2025 at Castle Dene Shopping Centre, Peterlee. On the material date the vehicular approach to the relevant area lacked a mandatory entrance sign. A subsequent appeal was allowed for inadequate/unsupported signage. Dated photographs and the appeal outcome will be produced at trial.

2. DVLA records confirm that Ranger Services Ltd obtained the Claimant’s keeper data in relation to the above PCN, stated to be on behalf of CP Plus Ltd. The DVLA disclosure will be produced.

3. The Claimant will rely on later photographs showing installation of a new entrance sign months after the event, corroborating the absence of a compliant entrance sign on the material date. These will be produced.

4. Roles (pleaded in the alternative):
   (a) CP Plus Ltd acted as data controller and Ranger Services Ltd acted as its processor/agent in obtaining and using DVLA keeper data; or
   (b) Ranger Services Ltd acted as an independent controller using its own DVLA access; or
   (c) both acted as joint controllers.
   Liability is joint and several in each alternative. Supporting materials will be produced.

5. Unlawful processing (UK GDPR/DPA 2018): the Defendants had no reasonable cause to obtain or use the Claimant’s DVLA data because, absent a compliant entrance sign, no enforceable parking contract could arise. Any reliance on Article 6(1)(f) failed the necessity and balancing test, and the processing breached Articles 5(1)(a)–(b) (lawfulness/fairness and purpose limitation). The “reasonable cause” requirements in the DVLA KADOE arrangements will be relied upon; the relevant clauses will be produced.

6. By obtaining and/or using the Claimant’s personal data without a lawful basis the Defendants contravened UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, causing distress. Particulars and supporting materials (including DVLA records, photographs of approaches/signage, and correspondence) will be produced at the witness statement stage.

Remedy

Damages of £1,000 for non-material damage (distress) under ss.168–169 Data Protection Act 2018 (or such sum as the Court thinks fit not exceeding £1,500); interest pursuant to s.69 County Courts Act 1984 from the date of unlawful DVLA access (to be evidenced); the issue fee; and such further relief as the Court thinks fit.

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

GettingOnInYears

That is the ideal scenario. Again - I was up at 4 this morning trying to put everything together and with no expertise in this stuff was already on page 6. God bless you. One problem though ... MCOL can't be used for multiple defendants so I need to post it.
I presume the witness statement will need to be padded out though to incorporate everything including all the agonising personal distress stuff

doubledotcom

For now, you need to concentrate on issuing the claim. The WS and evidence come much later, once it has been transferred to your local county court. You need to see their defence to the claim.

GettingOnInYears

I haven't heard from Northampton about the one posted to them. I need them to scrap it so I can send the new POC and claim. I'm guessing they won't register it until payment has been made though. 
In the meantime, the letter from their in-house solicitor in response to my LBA was just a dismissive apologetic statement that they do accept that no entrance sign was present, they won't pay compensation and that they would defend any court action. That completely fails Pre Action Protocol. 
I also laid a trap by emailing her again : "Further to your letter dated 19th September I would be grateful if you could clarify the following point for the record:
Was the decision to deny compensation — and to advise me that any legal action would be vigorously defended — made by you personally, or were you acting under instruction from a senior officer or department within CP Plus Ltd, Ranger Services Ltd, or GroupNexus? This question arises in light of your acknowledgement that the mandatory entrance sign was not in place, which formed the basis of my original complaint.
Given your role as Head of Enforcement and a regulated solicitor, I trust you will appreciate the importance of transparency in this matter, particularly as it relates to accountability and the proportionality of the response issued.
I look forward to your reply."

The reason for that is have her accept that she was the decision maker. It gives credence to the next email I sent : 

At this stage of the proceedings, Ms Yates, you may not be aware of my personal circumstances, which are deeply tragic. The emotional toll of having to pursue this matter — in the face of procedural deflection and late admissions — has had a profound impact on me. I am not a legal expert, but I am a person fighting for fairness while navigating immense personal hardship. My wife is now in a care home, struggling badly with late-stage Alzheimer's, and the energy required to pursue this claim has come at great emotional cost.
I respectfully suggest that it may now be in everyone’s best interests to resolve this matter without further litigation. A proportionate settlement would avoid unnecessary court time, mitigate reputational risk, and allow me to redirect my limited energy toward supporting her.
I am close to finalising my witness statement and Particulars of Claim, and intend to file them next Friday if I do not hear back. I note that you were registered with the Solicitors Regulation Authority in November 2023, and while I would hate to make a complaint against a relatively new appointee — knowing the potential consequences — I am fully prepared to do so if we cannot agree terms.
Please — let us settle this unnecessary and increasingly acrimonious matter.

Lack of a response to either of the emails will be stupid of her - and by refusing to come to terms with a resolution as requested in email 2, she has only compounded her situation. In fact not only in respect of the claim - but also in regards to her lack of ethical conduct that the SRA requires. It also makes clear my personal situation so she can't argue against any request for aggravated damages

doubledotcom

Whilst I sympathise with your situation, you are not approaching this in a realistic manner. You’re expending considerable effort quixotically—tilting at windmills—instead of directing that energy to steps that will actually progress the claim.

This is what I think you should do:

1. If you’re not up against time: send one clean “without prejudice save as to costs” offer now (e.g. £1,000 plus issue fee if later paid, each bears own costs, 14-day deadline). If it’s not accepted by the deadline, issue via MCOL on day 15.

2. If you need to issue immediately (limitation/strategy): issue via MCOL today and send the same WP SaC offer the same day.

3. Stop fixating on the posted claim. If no fee was paid, nothing was issued. Forget it and proceed via MCOL.

4. Issue via MCOL:
   • Claim value: £1,000 for distress plus s.69 interest and the issue fee.
   • Defendants: the companies only (correct legal names and registered offices).
   • Use a short MCOL statement and state that full Particulars will follow within 14 days of service.

5. Serve full Particulars on time:
   • If you tick “Particulars to follow”, serve your concise PoC within 14 days after deemed service of the claim form, and file a certificate of service within 14 days of serving them. Miss nothing.

6. Park the theatrics with the in-house solicitor:
   • Do not try to pin personal blame on her. It adds no value and can backfire. Keep all settlement communications brief, professional, and WP SaC.

7. Keep sensitive personal detail out of pleadings:
   • Personal circumstances are not a lever for aggravated damages on small claims. Keep distress particulars brief and clinical; include only what supports causation in the witness statement.

8. Evidence comes later:
   • Do not file exhibits with the claim. Photos, DVLA data, code extracts, and the admission about the missing entrance sign go in your witness statement bundle per directions.

9. File/send in order:
   a) MCOL claim with quantified damages and interest.
   b) If you used a short MCOL statement, serve the concise PoC within the 14-day window and file the certificate of service.
   c) When directions arrive, comply on time with your witness statement and exhibits.

10. Final reality check:
    • Every minute spent baiting the solicitor or arguing protocol minutiae is a minute not spent issuing correctly and meeting deadlines. Issue now, serve on time, keep communications WP SaC and minimal, and let the defendants either pay or defend.