Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • sorry but that letter needs to be much much better. you need to express that it was a stilly youthful mistake trying to be the big man and jumping the turnstile to look big infront of your peers. TfL prosecutors are on the email address on their first letter. get the court form sent back to the court , (but copy it first) stating you plead guilty and wish to attend to address the judge in person face to face to show your genuine remorse for your stupid youthful exuberance.      
    • I thought I should send the begging letter to the prosecutor. Does the hearing means the time I need to send back by? If so, it’s June 5  I plan to send the new begging letter as following, can I ask for some suggestions? Dear Investigator/Prosecutor,  Thank you for your reply. I deeply regret my actions and the inconvenience they have caused.  I’m extremely remorseful for my crime. and regret it everyday. I often ask myself ‘’how can I do that thing just because I felt it is interesting. There are a lot of crimes in the world, but feeling it’s interesting is certainly not a reason to crime. I should not crime with any reason.’’ I think about these things every day, and I understand that I can’t blame anyone but myself.  I thanks to the staff who stopped me, as this is a valuable lesson in my life. I told myself that I should never ever repeat such a thing again, and never ever do anything which is possible to be in breach of any law. As a result, I carefully tap my oyster card every time before I enter the station now. I remind myself that I did a wrong thing before, and I should never let it happen again.  Although my monthly travel expenses do not warrant a season ticket, but I just renew my season ticket (please see the attachment). I understand that a crime cannot be truly compensated for, but purchasing a season ticket offers me a small measure of comfort, knowing that my actions caused a loss to the public interest.  I received an email which ask me to negotiate being class teacher in this summer (please see the attachment). I hope that I could teach the lovely students again, which may not be allowed with a criminal record. I would please ask that you would please provide me a single opportunity to settle all outstanding sums owed outside of court without the need for legal proceedings which would have a determinantal impact on my teaching career.  I sincerely apologise again for my crime. If you need anything further from me to help you please let me know.   Yours sincerely,
    • LoL Dx you crack me up. Thanks for the advice. I'll stay positive.
    • Utter Rubbish!! lowell dont write and beg for deals once they start court. as for your attitude, we'll thats nothing new for you.😎 you wont be quizzed, it's not like TV, simply refer to your defence/WS when answering anything the judge may ever ask. well it involves chickens. dx  
    • Thanks fk, I hope I don't have to face the court. Bless you for the reassurance. 
  • 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

Experian Ltd want ID to comply SAR - court Claim Issued - - Breach of the Data Protection Act 2018


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 372 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

Experian Limited filed a defence (attached below) in respect of the claim issued against them for failing to comply with their data protection obligations.

 

At paragraph 10 of their defence they state the following:

"Entirely without prejudice to the Defendant's position according to paragraphs 6 to 8 above, on 14 June 2022 the Defendant took the practical view that, with further investigation, it could satisfy itself as to the Claimant's identity."

My understanding is that the without prejudice rule is reserved for parties to enter into genuine settlement negotiations without later prejudicing their position in court.

Am I missing something here? I cannot see how the use of "without prejudice" in a defence filed directly to court can expect to benefit from the privileges outlined above.

A defence does not form part of genuine settlement negotiations, and one would expect if what was written was not intended to be considered by a judge then they would not submit it to them as evidence.

It appears to me as if they have inserted an admission directly into their defence.

EX - Defence - Redacted.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

'Without prejudice' can have different meanings in different contexts.

 

In my view they aren't saying it's a 'without prejudice' settlement negotiation. They aren't making a settlement proposal or making an admission, they are asking for your claim to be struck out. I can't see how a strike out application could ever be a settlement negotiation.

 

They are saying that although they decided that, on the specific facts of your case, they could satisfy themselves of your identity and sent you a passkey they nevertheless maintain their legal position stated in paragraphs 6 to 8 is correct and they were not required to send you a passkey because you had not provided sufficient ID to meet their requirements. 

 

"Notwithstanding the Defendant's position according to paragraphs 6 to 8 above, ...." would have been a clearer way of putting it, but lawyers can't resist jargon.

 

Do you agree with their statement in paragraph 10 that on or about 14 June 2022 they sent you a letter with a passkey you could use to access your data?  If it isn't true then of course you can challenege it.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ethel.

I agree with paragraph 10 save for the fact that it does not prejudice their position, it supports my position that they could and should have fulfilled the request inline with their statutory obligations.

I disagree that they had any reasonable doubt as to my identity as they were quite happy to correspond with me extensively prior to the request and discuss personal data pertaining to my account. The time to request any further verification as to my identity was before entering into those discussion if they had any doubt as to my identity.

 

It is my view they later manufactured that doubt to bring about exactly the events that took place, in order not to immediately respond to the request despite having the means to do so. These manufactured doubts evaporate when they receive a letter before claim and/or a complaint from the ICO.

They either had a genuine but incorrect belief that they were not required to fulfil the request, or in my view more likely used their bogus process to unduly influence me into believing I had no further right to access my data without jumping through their unnecessary hoops.

They were disabused of this by my letter of claim as well as the complaint they received from the ICO.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

In response to the complaint they received the ICO provided their view that Experian Limited have not complied with their data protection obligations.

I provided Experian a copy of the ICO's letter along with an offer to settle.

Experian ignored the offer I made but have now written to me saying that payment is on the way for the value of the claim £400 and the issue fee £50.

Their legal team also provided a half hearted apology for the delay in responding to my DSAR.

The delay was in total 7 months and 4 days beyond the statutory timeline to respond and no one would put their name to the email.

I have reverted back to Experian regarding my costs.

Edited by Intrepid
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Experian Ltd want ID to comply SAR - court Claim Issued - - Breach of the Data Protection Act 2018
  • 4 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...