DVLA and Data Protection Complaints?

gazhob

@Coupon-mad - you have confused me a bit with this response.

Your response to my initial post suggested that there wasn't a case but now there is?

cooldude255220

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81900565#Comment_81900565

Apologies - I was looking at a comment of yours from 2010 - clearly not the same matter!

gazhob

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81900576#Comment_81900576

Phew... 😀.... I can't even recall messaging on that case

gazhob

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81900523#Comment_81900523

I suppose the question here then is what would be reasonable to say that they knew or ought to know the keeper wasn't the driver.

They have been told on three occasions now and clearly have no evidence to the contrary. In which case surely the continued retention would be questioned?

cooldude255220

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81900594#Comment_81900594

I think the Courts would be reticent to find that there had been a breach in circumstances where the original obtaining/processing was lawful, unless clear and unambiguous evidence that the keeper is not the driver has been provided and ignored.

I'm sure there are plenty of cases where PPCs are told the keeper wasn't driving but in fact they were driving!

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81900568#Comment_81900568

That's not quite what I said.

I said:

"they are allowed to issue a non-POFA NTK. It's not void and it isn't unlawful data use. Nobody said it was! Not sure why people make that leap. Forget that."

But if you establish beyond doubt with a few replies to their letters, that you were not driving and want your data erased or you'll sue them, then you could try a claim.

As @cooldude255220 said though, it would be a stronger case if you can prove you weren't there. And county court judges are a mixed bunch, some of whom would probably not be with you, so it might not be easy.

dxbcc

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81900245#Comment_81900245

That is partly correct, I won based on the unlawful processing of my personal data, because a) I already had permission from the leaseholder, UKPC had nothing to offer, but also b) The entrance to the barrier-controlled car park in question is located well before the visitor area covered by UKPC's signage (their ANPR camera was reading vehicles too early, before their entrance signage), so there was no way that UKPC's terms could apply.