Jump to content

kurvaface

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    2,062
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

kurvaface last won the day on January 3 2012

kurvaface had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

380 Excellent

About kurvaface

  • Rank
    Classic Account Holder
  1. The thing is, as the first defendant settled, they gave me some information I didn't have before which makes my case stronger - the second defendant gave the first a made up voice recording where they cut and snipped sections of other recordings to make it look like I consented to calls. I have my own recordings of all the calls so have been able to identify how this fake call was stitched together. Secondly, I have since received calls in which I have been threatened with "Millions" of further calls if I do not withdraw my complaint.... Grounds I think for a different approach?
  2. I don't mind losing the court fee but I wouldn't want to be barred from bringing the claim. What do I need to do to ammend my particulars of claim?
  3. Hi all - it's been a while. I have a technical question about reissuing a small claim. I have started a small claim against two companies pursuant to PECR 2003, the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. The basic story is that the first defendant commissioned the second defendant to generate potential sales leads for them. The second defendant did this by making "Survey" calls from India and then the second defendant sold the opted in leads back to the first. They used Indian call centres, out of date data and ignored the TPS register. I've logged calls going back 4 years. several times over this period I have identified that the second defendant was party to this business activity on my line and notified them to stop - but they didn't. The first defendant didn't exactly know how the leads were generated because they didn't ask. I'm sure some clever legal person would explain how this is negligent. The first defendant has offered to pay about 15% of the claim plus my claim costs and has also apologised and terminated their use of the second defendant. The first defendant is a very big UK nationwide retailer (Sounds like dicks and carhorn whorehouse) of all things technical and is branching out into providing / distributing broadband services - hence this business activity. The second defendant is a grubby bottom feeding outfit that is responsible for probably millions of the spam calls that are made in the UK each day. I have agreed to settle with the first defendant and have signed and returned N279 Notice of Discontinuance. I think I am better off getting them out of the picture and it saves having to argue vicarious liability or negligence etc. Since proceedings started in June, the survey calls have continued. I know the second defendant is responsible because they are calling asking for the same incorrect name of someone who has never lived at my house. Some of the calls are exceptionally abusive. I would like to discontinue against the second defendant too and reissue a bigger claim. Is this ok?
  4. I haven't formally S7d them although I have asked them in writing to disclose all parties involved. They disclosed the name of a company called Lead Performance Ltd as the company who did the sugging survey. They In turn said some other company did the sugging calls who in turn then said someone else was involved who I turn blamed it all on some indian chap. I'll Send a proper sar along with £10 and leave them to dig a hole for themselves.
  5. The issue: I have a TPS registered phone line, ex-directory never given out. We have it for a family member who is dying and waiting for an organ transplant. Every call on the line causes considerable distress for obvious reasons as it's only meant to be used by our transplant centre. Since 2011 we have logged approximately 4000 sales calls, up to 30 a day on some days, sometimes in the early hours of the morning. The unique thing about all of these sales calls is that the data they hold is correct in every respect except for the surname. For arguments sake, they always ask for Mr Bloggs. The calls usually come from India and are usually marketing under the guise of a survey (Sugging). The callers refuse to provide an address, disclose on whose behalf they are calling, acknowledge our demands not to be called or explain why they are calling a TPS line. They are often abusive if we do not cooperate. In feb this year, after discussing with the ICO, we decided to play along with the calls to see who was commissioning them. We notified them if they continued to call we would play along. All the calls were recorded. In every instance we told the callers not to let anyone call again or there would be consequences. The questions they asked were about Ppi, broadband, utilities etc. Many companies have called off the back of this sugging call and we have taken action against them all. Scottish power also made sales calls to us off the back of the sugging calls. We instructed Scottish power (S.7 of the Data Protection Act) to disclose where they got our number from and to disclose the permission they have to market to our line. We instructed them to suppress our data to this opt-in (S10 and S11 of the Data Protection Act). This was back in March. They have not confirmed how they got our number other than to say in future they will make sure they screen all sugging calls against TPS and record all sugging calls. The sugging calls for Mr Bloggs continue today. It is self evident that Scottish power have not suppressed our data. I intend to bring proceedings against them pursuant to The Privacy And Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003, The Data Protection Act 1998 and The Protection Froma Harassment Act 1997 to recover £1925 for my time dealing with this plus additional damages for distress and anxiety in the discretion of the court. My questions are: 1) Scottish power is registered in Scotland. Can I pursue them in England? I live in England and they were calling me from an english call centre. 2) The energy ombudsman have stated it is not a case they would deal with. What other means of alternate dispute resolution are open to me? 3) does the Data Protection Act apply in the same way in Scotland? Any answers gratefully received. Thanks KV
  6. Are you thinking the claim might not have been served correctly?
  7. Plumber's business is trading from its registered address. It appears to be a proper functioning business. The call centre business seems to be registered at the directors home
  8. Hi there, I am claiming against 2 companies for breach of the protection from harassment act 1997 and breach of Regulation 21 of the privacy and electronic communications EC directive regs 2003. The gist is that a uk ltd company that owns a call centre in South Africa has been repeatedly calling me in order to generate a boiler sales lead for another uk based plumbing company. The claim is for £695 plus damages in the discretion of the court. I have judgement by default against the boiler company as they never responded. They had been corresponding with me before the claim stating that I should be TPS registered etc and that their calls are my fault, but since I started tthe claim, I've heard nothing. Although I haven't seen the judgement, I have been told by the court it is on the way and that they must pay by dec 3rd. I was going to file for judgement against the call centre company, but then they submitted a late acknowledgement of service and then a late response which I haven't seen yet. I don't believe that the defense will stand up to scrutiny. I do believe I will win. My question is can I go after the boiler company now for the money or do I need to finish off the call centre company first?
  9. Marketing emails must have a clear optout. Failure to do so is a Breach of he privacy and electronic communications ( EC dirctive ) regulations 2003. Report to oft....
  10. I haven't made a complaint yet although I have discussed this with them. They are quite clear that Section 11 of the Data Protection Act allows some lee-way with regard to data supression and it would be reasonable for me to give marketers time to stop processing my data. However they are equally clear that a "stop calling" request pursuant to regulation 21 of the Privacy and electronic Communications regs prohibits any further telephone calls at all. The argument of those that don't pay up is that they were not aware of my opt-out. My Counter argument is that they are liable, vicariously, because they have been negligent in their lack of rigour in ensuring their data supply is all opted in for marketing.
  11. Hi Guys, This is a technical legal question regarding liablity. At the end of a recorded marketing phone call from the philippines purporting to be a survey( Sugging), I gave a notice pursuant to Regulation 21.(1)(a) of the Privacy and electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003, prohibiting the use of any of my data including my phone number for the purposes of marketing. For those in the know, this would also fall under Section 11 of the Data Protection Act too. Following this call, I have received various further marketing calls from various UK based marketing companies. In each case I have managed to establish that the UK marketing call resulted from data acquired in the "Philippines" sugging call. I have sent the companies invoices for my time dealing with their calls. Most have paid. I have started small claims against those that wont pay pursuant to Regulation 30 of the above mentioned regs. They argue that it was not their fault that they called me because they believed the data from the Philippines was fully opted-in. I argue that the Directors of the marketing companies are vicariously liable by negligence (With regard to not taking due care with their data sourcing) and therefore I will claim damages off them pursuant to section 3 of the Protection from Harassment Act. Is this an acceptable approach? I will go after the data provider too once I have settled with all the marketing companies that have used the data. What do you think? KV
×
×
  • Create New...