Counterclaim - Civil Enforcement Ibis Hounslow - WON £500

Coupon-mad

How I loved re-reading that full hearing!

@Swedishcabbie you could send them that transcript and say how very reasonable your claim is when compared to the very similar VCS v Ferguson, where VCS ended up paying £1550 (plus their advocate's costs).

I'd encourage CEL to explain why the data abuse and harassment you have suffered is somehow not worth fair compensation comparable to the four figures granted to Mr Ferguson (and the four figures plus costs granted by the CoA to Miss Ferguson in her landmark harassment case v British Gas)?

And add that if it goes to trial, unlike Mr Ferguson, you WILL be seeking costs on the indemnity basis on top of the claim, and your daily rate of lost earnings to attend court is £xxx because a cabbie obviously can't work from home or make up lost fares!

1505grandad

"One would reasonably expect a professional company that relies solely on vehicle images (and nothing else) to actually give those images maybe a smidgen more than a cursory glance……"

Perhaps a strong complaint to DVLA outlining the case/counter claim as they have blatantly breached the KADOE contract:-

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a81a0c7e5274a2e8ab55036/Annex_A_-_KADOE_Fee_Paying_Contract_V4.pdf

"B7. Accuracy of the Data

B7.2. The Customer shall ensure before relying on any item of Data that the Data provided matches the information in the request (for example, so that the model, type and colour of the vehicle match) and shall not seek to recover payment where the Data provided does not match the vehicle information in the request."

Swedishcabbie

Thanks for all that, at this point is there anything I need to do other than wait for the hearing date?

Regards,

SC

Coupon-mad

I would send them the reply I suggested because it might save you the hearing.

DrLex

Seems odd to put a without prejudice offer in a defence, especially when phrased as one “save as to costs”.

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81903022#Comment_81903022

Yes I saw that as odd too. WP offers are not meant to be mentioned in submissions.

Swedishcabbie

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81902999#Comment_81902999

I’ll do that for sure, do I cc my local court as well or just CVL? Here’s what I created so far:

Dear Sirs,

I write further to your recent correspondence and your Defence in the above matter.

I note that your Defence contains what appears to be a settlement offer, which is an unusual and procedurally irregular inclusion in a court submission. I also note that your offer of £300 falls significantly short of my counterclaim of £500, and does not address the discontinuance of your original claim, nor any acknowledgment of the unlawful data processing and harassment that forms the basis of my counterclaim.

I draw your attention to the case of Vehicle Control Services Ltd v Ferguson, Claim No. G2QZ60G1, Portsmouth County Court, 14 May 2021, which bears striking similarities to the present matter. In that case, VCS pursued a driver using incorrect vehicle evidence, the driver counterclaimed for data misuse and harassment, and VCS ultimately paid in excess of £1,550 plus the advocate’s costs. The Court of Appeal subsequently awarded Miss Ferguson a further four-figure sum plus costs in her landmark harassment case against British Gas.

I would invite you to explain why the data abuse and harassment I have suffered at your hands is somehow worth materially less than the compensation awarded in those cases, given that the facts here are at least equally egregious. Your company obtained my personal data from the DVLA under the KADOE contract, which expressly requires you to verify that the vehicle data matches before relying upon it and before pursuing any individual. The entry photograph in this case showed a vehicle bearing a different number plate entirely — a fact I raised clearly in my appeal, which your company rejected without proper consideration. You then continued to pursue me, causing quantifiable distress and wasted time.

I also note that your Defence claims you acted promptly to discontinue and then attempted to resolve matters amicably. The chronology of correspondence tells a different story.

My current counterclaim of £500 is, when viewed against the Ferguson precedent, a modest and reasonable sum. However, I wish to be transparent: if this matter proceeds to a trial, I will be seeking my costs on the indemnity basis, on the grounds that your conduct in pursuing a claim based on evidence showing a different vehicle’s number plate — and then misrepresenting the sequence of events in your Defence — is unreasonable conduct that warrants such an award.

I should also make clear that, unlike a salaried employee, as a licensed taxi driver I am unable to work from home or recover lost fares. My daily rate of lost earnings to attend a court hearing is £ XXX. This will be claimed in full for any hearing day required.

I remain open to resolving this matter without the need for a hearing, but any settlement must include full discontinuance of your original claim with no order as to costs on that claim, and payment of my counterclaim in full.

.

Coupon-mad

No need to send that to court, just email it as a reply to CEL's email but head it:

WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COSTS

and change this at the end:

any settlement must include full discontinuance of your original claim with no order as to costs on that claim, and payment of my counterclaim in full.

To this:

…any settlement must include full payment of my counterclaim and your Head of Legal, Abbas Ali, must report this data breach to the DVLA (it is a clear KADOE breach) and to the Information Commissioner's Office.

Swedishcabbie

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81904257#Comment_81904257

Thank you so much 🫡

Bazarius

In my opinion I would accept the £300 offered .

The reason being is that you have to prove that at least 2 occasions that they knew , or ought to have known that it was the wrong vehicle . At this point it is data breach causing alarm and distress . £300 is about the correct level compensation given the previous persuasive precedents available. Clay was £200 …

Harassment under PfHA 1997 ? I don’t think there is enough to prove your case of harassment, you only appeared to appealed it once and nothing further until you received the claim form . To prove harassment you need at least 2 or more letters of communication putting them on notice that it was the wrong car and this wasn’t done .

Ferguson v BG was I think at least 8 from what I remember, VCS v Ferguson was at least 4 letters and emails sent to the Part 20 Defendant and its multiple debt collection agencies.

Be warned, if you take them to court and the judge awards less you may have to pay their costs for not accepting the “Calderbank” offer . (Others on here may correct me on this ).

BTW there was no advocate costs awarded in VCS v Ferguson. He was awarded the full £1500 counterclaimed plus £50 counterclaim filing costs . (It wasn’t it was £80 he forgot the exact figure paid )