We've had two purported agreements so far, which I've attached. I suspect that the Shop Direct one might be compliant but I'm confident that the JDW one isn't. Can someone please confirm? jdw.pdf

Thanks very much. That's exactly what I wanted to know

I'm helping someone in financial difficulty that has 6 debts with Lowell. Do I send Lowell one CCA request (and £1) quoting all references or six requests, one for each original debt and 6 x £1?

Thanks very much for keeping this thread updated. I'd be very interested in any further developments if you don't mind

The arrears (or lack of them) are probably a bit of a red herring - the Op has been given a section 21 notice (I'm assuming that the property is let under an AST.)

In case you're not already aware of it: the Late Payment of Commercial Debt Act exists and can be very useful to small businesses

Yes but I was trying to help the OP given the situation that they are actually in rather than one they might/will probably be in. As things stand ll has served what purports to be a S21 but which isn't valid because the deposit in unprotected (if I understand things correctly)

Is the S21 valid though? The OP says that the deposit is not protected

Update: I gave him a week to collect them. He didn't. After he missed the deadline I asked for his bank details so I could pay him what I got from selling the ladders and he said he'd be there the next day. He wasn't, so the day after that I put the ladders up for sale in a local facebook group. An hour later they were collected

Brilliant! Thanks very much. It looks like section 12 and schedule 1 part 4(1) apply to my situation

He would disbelieve that they were stolen, certainly without me being complicit. They are huge - in excess of 5m and three separate ladders that weigh a considerable amount. (The same thought has crossed my mind) Can I legally dispose of them after the notice period? What law allows me to do this? It would be useful to know so I can quote it when I give him the ultimatum

Three weeks ago I had the fascias on my house painted. As I live in a three storey house this necessitated the use of a very large set of ladders. When he finished the work, the painter asked if he could leave his ladders at my house until Friday. I agreed. On Friday he did some remedial work and asked if he could leave the ladders until Monday when he would have his large van. I reluctantly agreed out of pragmatism – there was little he could do if I’d said no. Three weeks later, the ladders are still here and he won’t return my calls . I’m of the opinion that he is intending to leave them here until the next time he needs them, in effect forcing me to allow the use of my house as industrial storage but it could be that he’s gone out of business or dead or anything else. Ideally I’d like him to come and collect the ladders but there is no pressure or incentive for him to do so. Nevertheless I want them removed and have considered: 1) Getting the council to come and take the ladders for recycling (I know this is probably illegal) 2) Giving him a deadline then, if he doesn’t collect them, charging him for storage. 3) Giving him a deadline then, if he doesn’t collect them, selling them and give him the proceeds I don’t know if any of these ideas are lawful but there must surely be something I can do to get the ladders removed. Any suggestions?

The T&Cs say "If the funds aren't available in your account, or if your card has expired, you will be notified and given the opportunity to pay the amount due." Something has gone wrong with the final payment for whatever reason but she should have been notified and given the opportunity to pay it before they cancelled the ticket. Its only following a failure to pay after notification of a missed payment that she is at risk of the ticket being cancelled. ("After notification if you are unable to process the amount due you may incur additional charges or your booking with be cancelled with no refund"). Did they notify her and give her the opportunity to pay and, if so, why didn't she just pay?

Re one standing charge per meter: Are we saying that customers on economy 7 (two meters; one for day, one for night) should/do pay double the standing charge compared with a standard meter? That doesn't seem right to me. Re three meters: In the dim and distant past there was a tariff called "super tariff" that billed at three different rates; day, night and heat. Customers on that tariff had three meters, one for each rate. Its possible that the OPs property was on super tariff in the past and that SPs inability to deal with the situation is due to them having no concept of super tariff

BT are putting their prices up so should allow you to leave early without penalty. This is from the email I got from them on 10/02/2017.

What are you on about? The OP has nothing to do with which cases are heard in a county court and it isn't limited to small claims. It also includes fast track and multi track. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_procedure_in_England_and_Wales "The County Court hears all Small Claim and Fast Track cases. County Courts designated as 'civil trial centres' may also deal with claims allocated to the Multi Track." In other words, all small claims are heard in county court (as are fast track claims) but that doesn't mean that all cases heard in county court are small claims. County court is not (or at least shouldn't be) referred to as small claims court. Why not fast track court? (I accept that for most people, the claims that are issued are allocated to the small claims track but that isn't what you said. What you said was "County court is also known as small claim court" and it was this single sentence that I was clarifying)

Nope. County courts hear cases on the fast and multi tracks as well as the small claims track

Have posts gone missing? This is the first I've read of a claim and counter claim.

I haven't misunderstood anything. The OP wanted to know if what he'd been told was true - that the parking company had breached the DPA by passing his details on to a DCA (like MIL) and it matters not if the debt has been assigned or the DCA is acting as an agent for the parking company. DVLA have said that, under the terms of the KADOE contract, a parking company cannot pass data onto MIL without DVLA's permission. They didn't have this permission ergo the data has been disclosed to a third party (MIL) unlawfully. It makes no difference what the parking company's DPA registration says. Put simply, your assertion that "The entire point about suing a parking co as per VCS v Philip is that the parking co lied to obtain the information in the first place, not what they did with that information" is completely wrong in this case. This particular case is entirely about what the parking companies did with the data after they had obtained it - they did something they were not allowed to do based on KADOE and irrespective of their DPA registration - i.e. they disclosed it unlawfully. The relevance to the OP is that here is an example of a data protection breach caused by a parking company disclosing data to a debt collector. I stand by my original point that, if data is obtained unlawfully, it cannot possibly be processed or disclosed without breaking the DPA whatever the registration of the processor might say.

Sorry, but I disagree. Surely if the data is obtained unlawfully, any processing that is done with it, including passing it on to a DCA, is likewise unlawful ETA - it seems that DVLA take a similar view ;-) http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/dvla-confirm-massive-data-protection.html

He isn't talking about suing the DCA though. If you go back and read the very first sentence of this thread, it says "I am suing both a Parking company and a Supermarket company." As I see it, he was asking whether the release of his details to the DCA constituted a breach of the DPA by the parking company

And here's a report of an example of DPA damages(albeit settled out of court) http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/smart-parking-settle-out-of-court-for.html

No he isn't following fotl stuff, he's following established law (principally Vidal-Hall Vs Google Inc and Halliday Vs Creation Consumer Finance Ltd) . Its well documented on sites like parking prankster. Unfortunately the clear guidance I linked to above from elsewhere has been deleted because it broke site rules (the linked site is commercial). Having said that it shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes to find either that site or one with similar advice via google

It is if they had no entitlement to process the data in the first place. I think this is the route the OP is going down [external link removed - please read our rules -dx]

My guess is that they were originally generated against estimated reads. Then, when they got a firm read either from you or a meter reader, they went back and proportioned the actual usage against each of the billing periods back to the previous firm read, regenerating the bill each time. (Northern electric used to do this so that the correct tariff would be used if there'd been price changes between the two firm reads). Did you supply a reading as part of the attempted transfer?