Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Do you have broadband at home? A permanent move to e.g. Sky Glass may not fit with your desire to keep your digibox,, but can you move the items you most want off the digibox? If so, Sky Glass might suit you. You might ask Sky to loan you a “puck” and provide access as an interim measure. another option might be using Sky Go, at least short term, to give you access to some of the Sky programming while awaiting the dish being sorted.
    • £85PCM to sky, what!! why are you paying so much, what did you watch on sky thats not on freeview?  
    • Between yourself and Dave you have produced a very good WS. However if you were to do a harder hitting WS it may be that VCS would be more likely to cancel prior to a hearing. The Contract . VCS [Jake Burgess?] are trying to conflate parking in a car park to driving along a road in order to defend the indefensible. It is well known that "NO Stopping " cannot form a contract as it is prohibitory. VCS know that well as they lose time and again in Court when claiming it is contractual. By mixing up parking with driving they hope to deflect from the fact trying to claim that No Stopping is contractual is tantamount to perjury. No wonder mr Burgess doesn't want to appear in Court. Conflation also disguises the fact that while parking in a car park for a period of time can be interpreted as the acceptance of the contract that is not the case while driving down a road. The Defendant was going to the airport so it is ludicrous to suggest that driving by a No Stopping  sign is tacitly accepting  the  contract -especially as no contract is even being offered. And even if a motorist did not wish to be bound by the so called contract what could they do? Forfeit their flight and still have to stop their car to turn around? Put like that the whole scenario posed by Mr Burgess that the Defendant accepted the contract by driving past the sign is absolutely absurd and indefensible. I certainly would not want to appear in Court defending that statement either. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I will do the contract itself later.
    • Yes - ignore. Because of another MET victim today I looked at all our MET cases back to June 2014 ... yes, 10 years. They have never dared take a motorist to court and argue their case before a judge.  They have started the odd court case, but as a means of trying to intimidate the motorist into coughing up, when the motorist defended and refused to give in it was MET who bottled it and discontinued.
    • Unpaid wages should be pretty straightforward if you did the work. Don't be intimidated. You need only show you were due money, and did not get money.   The risk is that they have no money to pay you (and legal fees) - frankly a solicitor maybe be costing them more than your claim is for and I might have expected them to make a commercial decision to settle before this point regardless of the merits of the case.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Glastones/ES Parking DPA violation claim


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2671 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Dear all,

 

I'd greatly appreciate advice as I'm wanting to take ES Parking to court for breaching the DPA by claiming my details in the first place from the DVLA. I know this is going to be a long journey and lots of work but I'm willing to do it for the good of others and perhaps to teach them a lesson to stop harassing people when there is no basis for their claim.

 

I've been through the following so far:

 

 

Stage 1: Letter before claim:

 

__________________________________________________________________________

 

(Sent mid December)

Letter Before Claim (Ref number: XX111111)

Dear ES Parking

 

In May 2016 you issued me with a parking charge for stopping/parking in a publicly accessible road where no contract was formed and for which there were no road markings (provided courtesy of your own witness statement).

 

It has been established that there can be no liability as you do not follow the protocols of the POFA and so it is not possible for a contract to be created. You have continued to pursue speculative charges despite it being firmly established that no charge could ever be due. I refer to case C8GF4C12 ES Parking Enforcement v Ms A. Manchester, in front of DH Iyah on 29/11/2016. It was established that there was inadequate signage and that you lost the case on the grounds that signage is forbidding.

 

You obtained my personal details from the DVLA for the purpose of pursuing a parking charge, However, there was never any possibility this charge could be valid.

 

My name and address information (together with other information) is classified as personal data within the meaning of s1(1) of the Data Protections Act (DPA). As there is no possibility that any monies were owed to you by myself, then attempting to charge a parking charge is caused harassment and personal distress to myself, is using it in ways which violate principles 1 and 2 of the DPA, and s13 of the DPA provides for financial compensation for this.

 

The case of Vidal-Hall v Google Inc [2014] EWHC 13 (QB) provides authority that misuse of personal data is a tort and that damages may be non-pecuniary. The case of Halliday v Creation Consumer Finance Ltd [2013] All ER (D) 199 provides authority that a reasonable sum for compensation would be £750.

 

I am therefore claiming £500 from yourself for misuse of my personal data under s13 of the DPA.

 

You have 14 days to remit this amount to myself. After that time I will file a claim without further correspondence.

 

The rules on pre-action conduct are here

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct

 

I believe I have provided you with all necessary information.

I am willing to consider alternative dispute resolution and suggest the Consumer Ombudsman.

 

Yours Sincerely

 

__________________________________________________________________________

 

Stage 2: Claim filed with MCOL with the following details:

 

In May 2016 ES Parking breached the Data

Protection Act by accessing my details from

the DVLA without reasonable cause. It has

been proven on numerous cases including

C8GF4C12 ES Parking Enforcement v Ms A.

Manchester, in front of DH Iyah on 29/11/2016

that they have no grounds for pursuing a

parking charge. I am claiming damages of £750

for misuse of my personal data under s13 of

the DPA. I attempted to resolve this out of

court with a letter before claim for which I have received no reply.

 

__________________________________________________________________________

 

 

I've now received a defence which is attached

 

 

 

I'm willing to fight them to the death on this and money is no objective, this is purely about principle - ultimately this is going to cost me money because of time off.ClientDefenceDPA.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

no defence attached. Also you asked for £500 in the LBA and £750 in the claim. Did they comment on this disparity

 

I posted the claim form in stage 2 as stated. I kept it brief with some details as I thought I'd need all the details going into witness statement?

 

When they posted the claim form it had barely a line in it so I thought it would be enough! Can't believe the hypocrisy of them stating no details when they send me a one liner!

 

Do I need to resubmit it with a full defence as they have requested? Again - please be patient with me on this, I'm happy to spend as much time researching and reading as necessary but just need some legal guidance.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

no, they are trying it on as you seem to have noticed. They have done this before, see the pranksters blog. Anyway, you sent the lba so that will be part of your evidence.

 

You say do I need to resubmit a full defence? you are the plaintiff in this matter, are you asking about resubmitting a full particulars of claim? Well, what you say is clear enough for the particulars so it is clear that they are trying to get you to start again. If you get a case management order to submit a fuller explanation then do so, this wont happen until the matter is allocated a track and a court though.

 

So what exactly does their defence say? twice you have alluded to it but you havent posted it. Also, did they send their demand via the courts or is it from them to you and not via the courts? If the latter they know that it is meaningless and are hoping that you are daft enough to give it credence.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras.
Link to post
Share on other sites

no, they are trying it on as you seem to have noticed. They have done this before, see the pranksters blog. Anyway, you sent the lba so that will be part of your evidence.

 

You say do I need to resubmit a full defence? you are the plaintiff in this matter, are you asking about resubmitting a full particulars of claim? Well, what you say is clear enough for the particulars so it is clear that they are trying to get you to start again. If you get a case management order to submit a fuller explanation then do so, this wont happen until the matter is allocated a track and a court though.

 

So what exactly does their defence say? twice you have alluded to it but you havent posted it. Also, did they send their demand via the courts or is it from them to you and not via the courts? If the latter they know that it is meaningless and are hoping that you are daft enough to give it credence.

 

 

Is their defence not attached to my initial message?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, talk about desperation. No paragraph numbers? If you only have 1 paragraph the it doesnt need numbering. Same goes for the rest, the allocation will be made in due course. It may well be decided that for £750 small claims is the appropriate track. Anyway, the matter of compensatory awards in small claims procedure has been dealt with by VCS v Philip. It was also accepted in another case I was involved with some time ago, if I still have the case files I will give you the case no, court etc so you can use that to show that it is the appropriate track.

It may be appropriate to send a letter to the court (copy to ES or their solicitor) just quoting the Philip desision and saying that it is the appropriate place. no need to start again, they are just hoping to bamboozle you into giving up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but note they are relying on not getting a new hole ripped into them when their claim against you is heard. They also mention trespass being a cause for them to access your details. NO, they have no rights or authority in amy matter of trespass, even if they are "agents" of the landlord. It is outside their authority. can you imaging trying to sell your house and a person viewing it parks on your drive when you dindt want tehm to, move the car whne asked to but theestate agnet then sues the viewer for tat parking event. You havet given the estate agent permission to do anything other than show people round the house so how vcan they say they have the authority to use details gathered for one purpose ( house view) for another ( suing of parking on your land). utterly ridiculous but there agin we are talking baout Gladstones Solicitors, people who tell lies to the DVLA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as I sent that last message I got the standard letter in the post from the courts with the questionnaire and stating the usual that it seems it is suitable for small claims etc.

 

Does this mean everything is going ahead and that letter was just one big fib?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It means that the courts service belive that there is a case to answer. It offers no judgemnt on the merits of either side's points at this stage, just that the small claims procedure is the correct way to hear the arguments.

As for asking for £450 costs, keep that piece of paper safe, you may well want to wave it in front of the judge who heards the ES claim as you can show that they are either undervaluing people's time as a LiP or they are filing claims that are losing them money so the only way of recovering their costs is by entering into a champertous agreement with ES ( read up on Champerty and Maintenance- bloody difficult to prove but you never know they may have just hanged themselves)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It means that the courts service belive that there is a case to answer. It offers no judgemnt on the merits of either side's points at this stage, just that the small claims procedure is the correct way to hear the arguments.

As for asking for £450 costs, keep that piece of paper safe, you may well want to wave it in front of the judge who heards the ES claim as you can show that they are either undervaluing people's time as a LiP or they are filing claims that are losing them money so the only way of recovering their costs is by entering into a champertous agreement with ES ( read up on Champerty and Maintenance- bloody difficult to prove but you never know they may have just hanged themselves)

 

Really wanted to say thanks for all your help ericsbrother. I am keen to keep working on this and also hope it will help many others. I would be very interested in finding a 3rd way to sue them and take them down further. If you believe this is possible then I'd be more than happy to file a 3rd claim against them. I'd really appreciate your continued support on this and if you believe there is any ground for us to take this much further then work with me and we will hurt them bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It means that the courts service belive that there is a case to answer. It offers no judgemnt on the merits of either side's points at this stage, just that the small claims procedure is the correct way to hear the arguments.

As for asking for £450 costs, keep that piece of paper safe, you may well want to wave it in front of the judge who heards the ES claim as you can show that they are either undervaluing people's time as a LiP or they are filing claims that are losing them money so the only way of recovering their costs is by entering into a champertous agreement with ES ( read up on Champerty and Maintenance- bloody difficult to prove but you never know they may have just hanged themselves)

 

What are the possible legal avenues at this stage? Honestly don't mind shelling out money at this stage if I have a good chance of winning.

Link to post
Share on other sites

there is nothing further to do at this point. The case will be allocated to a court eventually and both parties will get a directions questionnaire.

 

the poit about this claim for £450 costs is that it is not the same as the costs they claim for the same amount of work with their claim against you so they are not being honest in one or other of the cases.

 

If they are telling the truth about costs when they sue you then thsi claim for costs wont stand up and if this is the true cost of proceeding against you then they must be taking on business that only pays when they win (as there is no money coming from client at outset) and that means they can only continue theiraction by taking the profits for themselves and that is likely to be Champerty as the original claimant no longer has an interest in the matter.

 

It is not a matter of money, it is a matter of knowledge. Unless someone accidentally provides copies of the ES and Gladstones accounts you will never really get the smoking gun you need so keep to what you can do.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...