Jump to content

jotty

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    448
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

40 Excellent

About jotty

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Which is what I said, but you seem to have gone off on a slight tangent. The OP needs to be sure that she has all the correct docs V5, insurance etc, because if the insurance people haven't updated MIDS or she still hasn't informed DVLA then the database the Police use will also be out of date. Its a simple phone call to insurance company and DVLA and then she has a case if they are all as she says to make a complaint.
  2. No the registration and insurance ones that would be the main reason why she is being stopped.
  3. And of course we don't know if the intel is wrong or out of date. So may be best for the op to get all the docs in order first and then consider a complaint.
  4. Why a formal complaint, whats to complain about ?
  5. Depends how long it takes for the intel to be verified and updated as that will be why she is being stopped, the car is flagged as being driven at some stage by a banned driver. If she registers it in her name and insures it the the intel will self archive as it no longer current. Simple really. I wish the Police would stop more people if I’m honest as the number of uninsured and illegal drivers out there is bigger than ever.
  6. Just make sure that she has insurance in her name. It’s not the fault of the Police after all we pay them to stop idiots driving around unlicensed and uninsured. They will be using ANPR most likely which is linked to the MIDAS database. Check with the insurers that they have done this.
  7. Of course it can be used in legal argument but it isn’t case law
  8. An award is not case law and doesn’t set a precedent over other courts, it can be used during summing up of a case but any judge can choose to ignore what another had done, look at the bank charge cases from years ago.
  9. Firstly dont under any circumstances go into this as an act of punishment as a judge will pick up on it and most likely rule against you. You are not applying for a CCJ, you are asking for the costs incurred in making the disclosure requests to be reimbursed and if they don't pay and don't defend then you can request judgement. Even then they can ask for it to be stayed so don't go thinking its a done deal. As I have explained, work out your costs, I have kept mine low so that it doesn't suggest to a judge that anything actually costs £50 for a letter for example, as the main purpose is to get it in the system and potentially to a judgement. If they do pay up, and many will, my advice is not to cash the cheque until they send the info from the SAR and then only if your happy. If you don't get it then seek judgement and even if it goes to court you can ask the judge to increase the costs due to the extra work. This will not be a case about GDPR etc as the judge will not make a decision on that, but it is great evidence of non compliance to take to the ICO.
  10. If it ever gets to a judge then every effort would have been made to settle prior to court, all pre application protocols will have been done and before that all evidence of non compliance from properly formulated requests. Not sure you are understanding the process, no one would got straight to court without months of work which is what the claim is for. The £25 fee applies to all cases under a certain amount and its the costs of preparing the months of requests that we claim for. In reality based on what many of these companies charge us, £50 for a letter !, we should be claiming much more but its hard to quantify from an evidential point hence why I keep mine under £100. If all these so called reputable companies did what they claim they do such as help customers then none of this would be necessary.
  11. Not sure what point your making but its all about getting them to comply
  12. We haven't won anything yet, and sadly a lot of people don't know what to look for when they get the documents from the SAR. That's why we all need people like Bankfodder and dx on here. Very important is not to give up and keep asking rather than letting things go as that's what all these companies want.
  13. The threshold will vary from company to company but I have worked on the estimate of £1000 and less as to instruct a solicitor to defend would cost more than this, but it depends how serious they are and how sure they feel about not giving out info. Its all about putting them on the spot legally to show that their procedures are flawed and how can we be satisfied they are going to adhere to GDPR rules if they cant even supply the info. Not sure how seriously the ICO would take the fact that any company had a ccj based on their non compliance but am certain it would't do any harm to their investigation.
  14. They where estimates of the time taken to prepare the requests and then prepare the court papers, much like when they charge me £50 a month in additional admin fees just for pressing send on a keyboard. I could have asked for more but as each company has a cost threshold before they decide to contest I didn't want to incur any further charges by being greedy unlike the companies we have to deal with.
×
×
  • Create New...