Contraventions of the Data Protection Act - NHS Trust

[totally_pennyless]

Nothing yet as I am still waiting for directions from the Court.

 

I am pretty sure I was given a month to prepare my Skeleton Argument.

[Ganymede]

Let us know when you receive the Court Order.

[totally_pennyless]

I will do. I imagine it will arrive in the post shortly.

 

Many thanks to everyone for their assistance thus far.

[totally_pennyless]

Dear all,

 

I have a conundrum as it seems I have encountered a slippery issue.

 

A hypothetical example:

 

A disabled person with a severe physical disfigurement (I don't have one of these in case anyone is wondering) goes into a pub. He is not readily served and often ignored by the bar staff. Whilst he is in the pub he notices that other members of the public are being readily served before him. This happens time and time again.

 

He raises these issues with the pub management and they allege "oh, sorry, we just didn't see you there."

 

The issue I face is when does poor service become direct discrimination (in this example and generally)? Further, when does the burden of proof reverse?

 

Section 4.5 of the Code of Practice states as follows:

 

"To decide whether a service provider has treated a service user ‘less favourably’, a comparison must be made with how they have treated other service users or would have treated them in similar circumstances. If the service provider’s treatment of the service user puts the service user at a clear disadvantage compared with other service users, then it is more likely that the treatment will be less favourable: for example, where a customer is refused service or a person’s membership of a club is terminated. Less favourable treatment could also involve being deprived of a choice or excluded from an opportunity. If the quality of the service being offered or the manner in which it is offered is comparatively poor, this could also amount to less favourable treatment."

Any input appreciated.

[AndyOrch]

Is this in connection to your other thread TP?

 

Andy

[totally_pennyless]

Yes, in part Andy. I have 6 claims, or heads of claims, against the Defendant in that case and direct discrimination is one of those claims.

[AndyOrch]

Ideally you should keep to one thread so that all the relevant information is together to get the best advice.....if you want it kept separate then you are in the wrong forum and I will have to move it ?

[totally_pennyless]

Thanks Andy.

 

If you think this thread is best added to the other then I will leave that up to you.

[AndyOrch]

Threads merged.

[totally_pennyless]

I have now received directions from the Court.

 

The strike out application is listed for a hearing on 8 July.

 

They have until 12 April to file and serve their Skeleton Argument.

 

I have until 10 May to file and serve my Skeleton Argument.

[totally_pennyless]

The other side sent me a letter today accusing me of being 'vexatious' and still threatening to apply for costs if I do not discontinue the claim in a week. Still no defence or skeleton argument in sight - funny that.

 

I have to say that it would not surprise me if the Judge bends over backwards for them.

[Guest]

yep, wait see what (if) they come up with by the 12th....take it from there

[totally_pennyless]

Indeed.

[Guest]

Indeed.

[legalistic]

The other side sent me a letter today accusing me of being 'vexatious' and still threatening to apply for costs if I do not discontinue the claim in a week. Still no defence or skeleton argument in sight - funny that.

 

I have to say that it would not surprise me if the Judge bends over backwards for them.

 

totally-penniless they can't serve a defence unless and until your claim is allowed to proceed and you have served amended Claim form/Particulars which are capable of being defended. From what you have said they have identified a point of law that is aimed to nip your claim in the bud. That point of law will be in their skeleton argument. If you come up with a real answer to said point of law then you could possibly file and serve a draft amended claim form/Particulars. But some difficult law first has to be dealt with.

[totally_pennyless]

I believe those points of law are most elusive. I am going to amend my particulars but only to make sure that every possible gap is filled.

 

The only reason they successfully applied to get the judgement set aside in my opinion is that they argue I am not disabled (not difficult to argue that when they have not complied with the pre-action protocol). It is of course a disability discrimination case.

 

I suspect though that that argument is going to run out of mileage very quickly.

[totally_pennyless]

Dear all,

 

I served a Letter before Action (LBA) by way of e-mail on a registered charity and received no response (but did receive read receipts).

 

The address I used was correct.

 

The matter has now gone to a County Court.

 

I am concerned they may now argue that the service of the LBA was not valid

as I did not receive permission to send this document to them by e-mail.

 

 

I am not sure if Practice Direction 6A would apply:

 

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/family/practice_directions/pd_part_06a#IDAPGXAC

 

Many thanks in advance.

[BankFodder]

Don't worry about it.

[totally_pennyless]

The other side's solicitors are threatening me with legal costs so it has become a bit of a concern. They have failed to mention why they failed to respond to the LBA.

[renegadeimp]

Solicitors will say whatever they are paid to say

[totally_pennyless]

Indeed.

[totally_pennyless]

I have also taken legal advice on this and the upshot is that as long as I can show the letter had got to the Defendant (which I can) the Court should accept I have made reasonable steps to complain to them first.

[AndyOrch]

Is this also in connection to this TP ?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?461449-Civil-Procedure-Rules-Strike-Out/page5

[totally_pennyless]

Hi Andy,

 

Indeed.

[totally_pennyless]

I have received the other side's skeleton argument. They have gone hammer and tongs at my PoC. It seems they are trying to get all six claims struck out.