Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm at work now but promise to look in later. Can you confirm how you paid the first invoice?  It wasn't your fault if the signal was so poor and there was no alternative way to pay.  There must be a chance of reversing the charge with your bank.  There are no guarantees but Kev  https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09766749/officers  has never had the backbone to do court so far.  Not even in one case,  
    • OK  so you may not have outed yourself if you said "we". No matter either way you paid. Snotty letter I am surprised that they were so quick off the mark threatening Court. They usually take months to go that far. No doubt that as you paid the first one they decided to strike quickly and scare you into paying. Dear Chuckleheads  aka Alliance,  I am replying to your LOCs You may have caught me the first time but that is  the end. What a nasty organisation you are. You do realise that you now have now no reason to continue to pursue me after reading my appeal since you know that my car was not cloned. Any further pursuit will end up with a complaint to the ICO that you are breaching my GDPR.  Please confirm that you have removed my details from your records. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I haven't gone for a snotty letter this time as they know that you paid for your car in another car park. So using a shot across their bows .  If it doesn't deter them and they send in the debt collectors or the Court you will then be able to get more money back from them for  breachi.ng your data protection than they will get should they win in Court-and they have no chance of that as you have paid. So go in with guns blazing and they might see sense.  Although never underestimate how stupid they are. Or greedy.
    • Thank you. Such a good point. They did issue all 3 before I paid though. I only paid one because I didn’t have proof of parking that time, only for two others.    Unfortunately no proof of my appeal as it was just submitted through a form on their website and no copy was sent to me. I only have the reply. I believe I just put something like “we made the honest mistake of using the incorrect parking area on the app” and that’s it. Thanks again for your help. 
    • They are absolute chuckleheads. You paid but because you entered a different car park site also belonging to them they are pursuing you despite them knowing what you had done. It would be very obvious to everyone, including Alliance that your car could not have been in two places at the same time. Thank you for posting the PCN so quickly making it a pity that you appealed since there are so many things wrong with it that you as keeper are not liable to pay the charge. They rarely accept appeals since that would mean they lose money but they have virtually no chance of beating you in Court. Very unlikely that they will take you to Court given the circumstances. Just in case you didn't out yourself as the driver could you please post up your appeal.
    • Jasowter I hope that common sense prevails with Iceland and the whole matter can be successfully ended. I would perhaps not have used a spell checker just to prove the dyslexia 🙂 though it may have made it more difficult to read. I noticed that you haven't uploaded the original PCN .Might not be necessary if the nes from Iceland is good. Otherwise perhaps you could get your son to do it by following the upload instructions so that we can appeal again with the extra ammunition provided by the PCN. Most of them rarely manage to get the wording right which means that you as the keeper are not liable to pay the charge-only the driver is and they do not know the name and address of the driver. So that would put you both in the clear if the PCN is non compliant.
  • 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

DP breech by Student Letting Agency


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2070 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

Did Glide state in their SAR response the basis upon which they are processing your daughter's personal data? If not, you can go back to them and push them on this. They will need to be very careful with their response because they do not have her consent.

 

I would also raise a complaint to Glide about the fact that your daughter told them she was not going to use their services and yet they still continued to try and provide a service. You should also speak to the Energy Ombudsman (https://www.ombudsman-services.org/sectors/energy) and see what they advise to do.

 

When the LA responds, you will need to carefully review their response. They will need to show that they had your daughter's permission to transfer her personal data to Glide. If they are unable to show this, then your daughter should be able to seek compensation for distress under the new DPA. There is a good blog about this here - https://www.mindmydata.co.uk

 

There is also one final question - if the LA unlawfully provided your daughter's personal data to Glide, does that mean that Glide are equally responsible as the LA? Glide do have a legitimate interest to process personal data, but the question is more about how they acquire that data in the first place (even if they believed it was done with your daughter's consent).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Glide state in their SAR response the basis upon which they are processing your daughter's personal data? If not, you can go back to them and push them on this. They will need to be very careful with their response because they do not have her consent.

Glide stated that the LA had sent her personal information in the form of a spreadsheet via an email. This is the email we have been trying to get Glide to provide as the spreadsheet does not contain any indication that her consent had been sought or given. We want to know if the email from the LA says anything about consent

 

 

I would also raise a complaint to Glide about the fact that your daughter told them she was not going to use their services and yet they still continued to try and provide a service. You should also speak to the Energy Ombudsman (https://www.ombudsman-services.org/sectors/energy) and see what they advise to do.

We have raised a formal complaint with Glide about the charges and asked them to explain why. They are ignoring her emails and have not given any explanation as of yet.

 

When the LA responds, you will need to carefully review their response. They will need to show that they had your daughter's permission to transfer her personal data to Glide. If they are unable to show this, then your daughter should be able to seek compensation for distress under the new DPA. There is a good blog about this here - https://www.mindmydata.co.uk

 

This is what we really want to see. They have previously admitted that they did not have all the correct paperwork for my daughter and the forms that they should have sent her to complete were about sharing info with Glide and Virgin. They realised the day before the tenancy they did not have this signed and completed paperwork from my daughter as they had sent all of the forms to an incorrect email address (their error) and had not chased its return or resent the forms when they realised they had sent the firms to an incorrect email address. She was in Thailand at the time and could not complete them so asked me to do so on her behalf. That’s when we realised her LA had passed on info without seeking her consent.

 

There is also one final question - if the LA unlawfully provided your daughter's personal data to Glide, does that mean that Glide are equally responsible as the LA? Glide do have a legitimate interest to process personal data, but the question is more about how they acquire that data in the first place (even if they believed it was done with your daughter's consent)

It will be interesting to see if there are any discrepancies when we compare the paperwork Glide sent with that of the LA .

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...