SAR non compliance success

[wonkeydonkey]

It has been a long haul but today we had victory in court.

 

Almost 2 years ago we found ourselves in dispute with a supplier, there really isn't enough room to tell all that followed but we have been in and out of court fighting ever since.

 

It ended with us having to serve a SAR to prove a point and that was a battle that took 16 months. Our supplier did not comply and we had to prove it. They applied every delaying tactic ever invented, late submissions of witness statements and defence, providing usless documents at random, applying for adjournments and then holding out on technicalites.

 

We acted as LIP and with guidance from our solicitor (top man)and sheer determination, today we did better than England and brought our score of wins to 5-0, as it was eventually proven they had not complied in full to the SAR under the Data Protection Act. So they had their Knuckles firmly wrapped, told to supply all the missing info or provide a damn good explanation, full court costs and expenses for today awarded.

 

Anyone going down this route we would encourage but also suggest they really do read up first as it is not as simple as "we asked for the information and they refused" today we had a sharp learning curve into

what is and what is not covered by the act. we faced a Barrister well up on the act and a Judge well up on the act, so we will pat ourselves on the back for coming out unscathed and hopefully be able to use our experiences to help cag members.

 

A victory for the little people I think.

 

 

WD

[dx100uk]

so this was a bailff company?

 

dx

[wonkeydonkey]

It started with a CCJ given by default, was transferred up the High Court, Enforcement took place at the wrong premises, they charged for work not carried out,(fraud) made physical threats to our staff, took us for 4k. illegally.

 

CCJ was set aside, enforcement was followed by an Interpleader and they had to pay every penny back. the Claimant got thumped with our legal costs and personal costs then refused to pay, we turned the table and sent in HCEO and got our costs. After the money was refunded we paid the claimant but they refused it saying they wanted more by way of costs. infact the demands they made read as a list and the only thing missing from it was a cuddly toy. They wouldn't listen to what the consequences of having their Judgment set aside meant and they went back to Court to get their claim reinstated and that was thrown out also

 

The dispute that had arisen was not our fault and we had to issue the SAR to get proof they had goofed from day one, they refused to comply in full to the SAR, the rest is history as told in the OP.

 

We did get enough from them to prove they had goofed but they have refused to accept any blame...hey ho, hey ho, its back to court we go.

 

WD

 

 

 

Now we can prove the dispute that started it all was not our fault they won't respond ...so back to court again we go.

 

wd

Edited July 1, 2010 by wonkeydonkey
expansion of post.

[RaeUK]

So far so good. So nice to see a post of yours WD.

Much love and best wishes

Rae

[wonkeydonkey]

Hi Rae

 

It has taken 100's hrs to get everything in place for today and I have also been helping another cagger since January so I havn't had much spare time. Hope your well or at least managing to cope with your ail's, have thought of you often xx

 

wd

[RaeUK]

Oh, I appreciate you've been busy [i've noticed mouldy sandwiches all over the forum!]. I'm getting by happily...

Take care hunni.

Rae

[tomtubby]

It has been a long haul but today we had victory in court.

 

Almost 2 years ago we found ourselves in dispute with a supplier, there really isn't enough room to tell all that followed but we have been in and out of court fighting ever since.

 

It ended with us having to serve a SAR to prove a point and that was a battle that took 16 months. Our supplier did not comply and we had to prove it. They applied every delaying tactic ever invented, late submissions of witness statements and defence, providing usless documents at random, applying for adjournments and then holding out on technicalites.

 

We acted as LIP and with guidance from our solicitor (top man)and sheer determination, today we did better than England and brought our score of wins to 5-0, as it was eventually proven they had not complied in full to the SAR under the Data Protection Act. So they had their Knuckles firmly wrapped, told to supply all the missing info or provide a damn good explanation, full court costs and expenses for today awarded.

 

Anyone going down this route we would encourage but also suggest they really do read up first as it is not as simple as "we asked for the information and they refused" today we had a sharp learning curve into

what is and what is not covered by the act. we faced a Barrister well up on the act and a Judge well up on the act, so we will pat ourselves on the back for coming out unscathed and hopefully be able to use our experiences to help cag members.

 

A victory for the little people I think.

 

 

WD

 

 

 

WELL DONE !!

 

You really have battled and you deserve a real pat on the back for this. I would be interested to know what is not covered by a SAR as this could be very helpful. Are you able to give any details?

[wonkeydonkey]

WELL DONE !!

 

You really have battled and you deserve a real pat on the back for this. I would be interested to know what is not covered by a SAR as this could be very helpful. Are you able to give any details?

 

Hi TT

 

We had studied Durant v Financial Services Authority throughly prior to the hearing, as he is given as the expert on "what is considered personal data and is meant by a relevant filing system in which data is held" we were right to have done so, fortunately the Judge and the Defence Barrister clashed on the interpretation of his findings that gives argument in defining "personal" in regard to any request for "personal data"

 

Very complicated and does need to be read very carefully.

 

Thanks for the public "pat on the back" for not many new caggers have read the history of this case and are able to understand the fight we have had or realise that this is just a drop of water compared to the Ocean we still have to swim to get justice.

 

WD

Edited July 3, 2010 by wonkeydonkey

[wonkeydonkey]

Oh, I appreciate you've been busy [i've noticed mouldy sandwiches all over the forum!]. I'm getting by happily...

Take care hunni.

Rae

 

Sorry about that Rae but on the plus side a lack of your delicious late night/early morning cheese & pickle sandwiches means I have lost over a stone in weight..... then again I think anxiety might have been a contibuting factor and in retrospect I missed out on a daily treat.:lol:

 

By the time we get this settled I dream of looking like Twiggy.:-)

 

WD

[tomtubby]

Hi TT

 

We had studied Durant v Financial Services Authority throughly prior to the hearing, as he is given as the expert on "what is considered personal data and is meant by a relevant filing system in which data is held" we were right to have done so, fortunately the Judge and the Defence Barrister clashed on the interpretation of his findings that gives argument in defining "personal" in regard to any request for "personal data"

 

Very complicated and does need to be read very carefully.

 

Thanks for the public "pat on the back" for not many new caggers have read the history of this case and are able to understand the fight we have had or realise that this is just a drop of water compared to the Ocean we still have to swim to get justice.

 

WD

 

Many bailiff companies will cite Durant as an excuse no to provide a copy of a screen shot.

 

Can you elaborate as to what the Judge agreed that you are entitled to receive.

 

Also, what do you now have to do. What is the next move?

[wonkeydonkey]

Many bailiff companies will cite Durant as an excuse no to provide a copy of a screen shot.

 

Can you elaborate as to what the Judge agreed that you are entitled to receive.

 

Also, what do you now have to do. What is the next move?

 

Hi TT

It is very difficult to place on open forum many of the details surrounding this stage of our battle for justice as the SAR was a evidence gathering exercise in preparation of further action yet to come. . What I will do is contact you again when the matter is finally settled and forward to you a copy of our pariculars of claim in relation to the non compliance claim, their defence and witness statement and the courts findings.This will give you a clear picture of what was considered to form an obligation by the defendaant under the act and what could be argued as being the grey area.

 

WD