Spring Parking ltd/DCB(Legal) 6 2019 ANPR PCNs claimform - 1-3 Upper Green East, Mitcham, Surrey, Cr4 2pe ***Claim Discontinued***

[FTMDave]

What date is their letter?

[brassnecked]

They are trying to get you to set aside their adverse judgment, not until they kill their claim first imho

 

[Nicky Boy]

You've put a lot of work (and some money) into this hitman...

 

Perhaps ask for your costs to date... plus discontinuance of their claim, in exchage for your set aside?

[hitman126]

 

16 minutes ago, Andyorch said:

If you have judgment with your claim, you cannot discontinue it......they can make application to set a side and you agree (Consent Order) to their application.

 

Yep, you're absolutely correct. The case doesn't get discontinued.

However, and this is again based on personal experience just over 5 years ago, the default Judgement can be Set Aside

upon application by the defendant and subject to a successful review and approval by a Judge. I'm not entirely sure though

how things transpire following that second review of the case by a Judge, as the personal case in question never progressed

that far.

 

[hitman126]

21 minutes ago, Nicky Boy said:

You've put a lot of work (and some money) into this hitman...

 

Perhaps ask for your costs to date... plus discontinuance of their claim, in exchage for your set aside?

 

Thanks for the kind words, @Nicky Boy. 

 

I take a more philosophical outlook on events of this nature and won't lose too much sleep over the money

I've had to lose through costs. It's just money which can always be earned again.

 

What however irks me to the extreme, is the amount of precious time I've lost in dealing with those scumbags,

as unlike money, I can never regain or reclaim it back. For someone with an extremely busy work and family life

as myself, words can barely describe my irritation.

 

 

Edited January 25, 2023 by hitman126

[hitman126]

11 hours ago, FTMDave said:

What date is their letter?

 

23rd Jan 2023.......this Monday.

Royal Mail stamp is dated the very next day, 24th Jan.

 

Got a busy work afternoon lined up and so not likely to pursue this later today, but I think it will  probably be worth reaching out to MCOL tomorrow to give them a heads-up and also ask for some direction (if they're willing to oblige) on how to proceed with the DCB Legal letter, more so considering the 'judgement awarded' status of my SAR distress claim which DCB propose using as a bargaining chip.

 

Any thoughts on this?

[Nicky Boy]

They can't offer legal advice, so you probably won't get any help from that quarter...

[Nicky Boy]

10 minutes ago, hitman126 said:

 

23rd Jan 2023.......this Monday.

Royal Mail stamp is dated the very next day, 24th Jan.

Oh, yes,

 

Quite a while after the mediation they refer to, and just happens to be the day the thread discussion turned towards issuing another SAR distress claim...

They're following the thread

[brassnecked]

Which means they are worried

[Nicky Boy]

I know hitman is (very understandably) peed off with the whole thing.

It's just a shame that now he has them on the ropes he just wants the whole thing finished with, without any recompense at all...

 

This is exactly the way the fleecers get their income, preying on the normal working man.

[hitman126]

Oh, something else that just dropped in my Inbox not long ago  - A reply from the ICO to my complaint on Spring Parking's processing of my personal data.

 Is it a coincidence that they've decided to propose that plea bargain? Please see the main body of the ICO email below.

 

 

 

Summary of your complaint

You have written to us because you are concerned with the way your personal data has been handled. Specifically, you made a subject access request to Spring Parking Limited on 25 September 2022 but you believe you have not been provided with all of the information you are entitled to. You have not received a response to your SAR. You have raised a further complaint and have still not received any information.

Our view

We have considered the information available in relation to this complaint and we are of the view that Spring Parking Limited has not complied with their Data Protection obligations. This is because you did not receive an appropriate response to your subject access request. We consider this to be an infringement of the legislation.

Under the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR), information must be provided without delay and at least within one calendar month (commencing on the day after receipt). This may be extended by a further two calendar months from the day after receipt for complex or numerous requests. 

Further action required

We have written to Spring Parking Limited about their information rights practices. We have told them they should now review your subject access request and ensure that they provide you with the appropriate response as soon as possible or within 14 calendar days.

Should Spring Parking Limited not provide you with the personal data to which you are entitled, you have the right to approach the courts for an order for your data to be released. Legal action of this nature is not something that the ICO can assist with and we would recommend that you seek some independent legal advice before taking this step.

We will not be taking further action on this case at this time. However please be assured that the concerns raised will remain on file to build up a picture of Spring Parking Limited’s information rights practices. Should we continue to receive complaints about them of a similar nature, your complaint may form part of our wider regulatory activity.

Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention.

Yours sincerely

 

Edited January 25, 2023 by hitman126

[FTMDave]

Before delving into possible complications, let's be clear - you deserve a standing ovation for what you've achieved so far.

 

If I wrote what I reckon Spring Parking were doing when they thought they'd got you for a grand and half I'd get a long ban from the site

 

Never in their worst nightmares would they have thought it would be them with the CCJ and them having to come to you cap-in-hand begging you to drop your claim.

 

But that's what happens when you mess with Hitman126!

 

The stuff about both of you dropping your cases was just a silly, childish joke from me to take the wee wee out of them.  I never thought they would really accept!

 

However ...

 

1.  As you & others have said, why don't they discontinue first?

 

2.  As you & others have said, yours can't be discontinued, but a set aside with consent would be possible, which presumably they'd accept.

 

3.  Remember how many PCNs there are - SIX.  And how many are cited in their PoCs - TWO.  I reckon their game is to realise they have made mistake after mistake and so to just give up on two of the PCNs.  And once the cases are dropped - start a new claim against you for the remaining four.

 

TBH that would still be a result.  £330 of their claim (plus all the interest) batted off for an outlay of £35.  With the return match to come.

 

Alternatively, if you're feeling very, very confident, you could demand they put in writing that they are withdrawing all six of the PCNs.

 

Methinks a period of negotiation is coming up with them.  I know we don't like e-mail, but it might be an idea to do this by e-mail to speed things up and reach a conclusion.  E-mail can be stopped later as a means of communication.  

 

What do you think about the way forward?  And what do the other regulars think?

Edited January 25, 2023 by FTMDave
Typo

[brassnecked]

Looks like a plan the ICO has been helpful, and are watching the fleecers, nothing ventured nothing gained, and if no SAR forthcoming you still have options.  No they must kill off all the tickets.

[Nicky Boy]

Continuing to pursue the SAR may be a sensible thing to do.

The fleecers are very reticent about complying with it.

Have they got something to hide?

As was mentioned, hitman needed the info, because he didn't actually know what he was defending...He still doesn't.

Do we definitely know exactly how many (undisclosed) pcn's they might have filed away?

We're assuming 6, but with the dog's dinner they've made of the poc, can we be sure?

Or, am I being paranoid?

Edited January 25, 2023 by Nicky Boy

[brassnecked]

There may well be something fatal to their case they are hiding otherwise the data would have been forthcoming.

[Nicky Boy]

Strange that ico have told the fleecers to comply, but if they don't, then hitman needs to obtain a court order... because ico won't pursue it any further.

I thought THEY were supposed to ensure compliance.

[FTMDave]

1 hour ago, brassnecked said:

No they must kill off all the tickets.

I originally thought you & Nicky Boy were wildly optimistic, but you're persuading me.

 

See what Hitman thinks the morn.

 

Spurred on by your enthusiasm, I've drafted -

 

 

Dear DCB Legal,

thank you for your letter of 23 January.

I took part in mediation in good faith in the hope that your client would do the same, not that they would faff around for more than a month before making a decision.  Mediation was 21 December.  Your letter to me was dated 23 January.

You are surely aware that in a month the county court claim process moves on substantially.  I no longer have just a claim.  I have a county court judgement in my favour.  Your client has lost the case.  I have won.  I am currently organising enforcement.

I confirm however that I am willing to do the equivalent of discontinuing - I will sign a consent order for set aside.  On three conditions.

1.  You client bares the cost of the set aside application.

2.  Your client discontinues their claim first.  Your client started litigation, not me.

3.  You confirm that your ambiguous statements "on the basis that the above Claim - xxxxxxx - against you is also discontinued" and "there will not be any further action from our office in relation to this matter" mean that your client is withdrawing their invoices dated
   02/02/2019
   16/02/2019
   18/04/2019
   29/04/2019
   31/07/2020
   20/08/2020.

You will remember that you couldn't decide which invoices you were suing me for.  Your Particulars of Claim included the same invoice four times, which would enrage a judge (attached).  I'm unaware if your client knows about this monumental balls-up.  Well they do now as I am copying this e-mail to them.

As part of this package I am also willing to not proceed with a second county court claim against your client for distress caused by failure to respect my Subject Access Request for the period from 16th November 2022 to date, which frankly they have no possible defence for.  By happy coincidence along with your letter I yesterday received a letter from the Information Commissioner's Office (attached) who is appalled by your client's behaviour.

I look forward to your reply at your earliest convenience.

 

Yours,

[Nicky Boy]

Perhaps slightly rework the last paragraph to turn it into an actual pre-action letter for the impending SAR claim to ram home the point?

[hitman126]

Morning All,

 

Thanks for all your kind and wonderful contributions in the last few hours which has really thrilled me and

for which I'm most grateful. @FTMDavethat draft letter looks awesome!! I'll probably propose some slight

change or two on the odd paragraph, but other than that I think it looks simply superb!! Thank you and more

on this later.

 

As far as Spring Parking are concerned and the events of the last 24 hours, i.e. the ICO email and letter

from DCB Legal, my personal opinion is that they have been unable to fulfil the SAR request..........simply

because they probably DO NOT have the requested data (PCN's) available. I'd like to be proved wrong on

this, but I strongly believe this is definitely the case.

 

I'm inclined to be really mean and submit claim after claim for their non-compliance of my Subject Access

Request and I'll bet my life the court would award me judgement each time, simply because Spring Parking

are in no position to fulfil the request. I might just choose to let them off the hook because I simply don't

have the appetite to waste too much precious time on them, but happy to oblige if there's a unanimous

view that I turn the screw on them.

 

In my opinion, we probably sometimes are guilty of holding these private parking companies in too high

an esteem and our expectation on their competence and capability to adhere to certain legislation could

be a bit misguided.

 

Anyone that is familiar with the subject matter will tell you electronic data storage can be very expensive,

especially when in this instance we're talking about data stored for alleged PCN's dating back to 2019, in

other words nearly 4 years ago.

 

I don't know to hand the specific regulations on private parking companies, but as this (data storage) is

something that is very relevant to my line of work, I do know there are regulations around the duration over

which certain industries or organisations are even allowed to retain some personal data. In many cases,

2 or 3 years is the maximum duration.

 

The big question therefore is, with these above factors in mind, i.e. data storage costs and data retention

compliance to adhere to, etc, are our good friends Spring Parking the sort of organisation that is equipped

with the required resources, e.g. finance and manpower, to fulfil all of these aforementioned demands?

If they're not, is that then any surprise they're unable to fulfil my SAR request?

 

Those parking company leeches cling onto the hope that they'll scare us into submission and without any 

fight back, but then when you face up to them, they're found wanting....................as in this particular case.

I can't recall the exact date, but there was an expert on this subject matter who appeared on BBC Breakfast

recently (within the last couple of weeks) and he reiterated this precise point - we should always take on the

parking companies because they simply prey on and take advantage of our ignorance and fear.

[Nicky Boy]

I would personally love to see you "turn the screws", but I can see you've had enogh of the whole thing.

 

So, since ICO have told them to comply with the SAR within 14 days, why not insist on their compliance (or an admission that they are unable to comply) as a condition of settlement?

 

At least you'd then know whether they're hiding other PCN's for later...

 

If they won't/can't comply then I think the PCN list in FTMDave's letter could read as "all PCN's to date"?

 

Also as FTMDave said, this is a period of negotiation.

The fleecers have made the first move, wanting the whole thing finished (at no loss to themselves).

Perhaps you should start off with a high offer and let them bargain you down a bit?

Maybe include settlement of the CCJ in the Pre Action letter?

When's the deadline for payment before CCJ becomes stuck for 6 years? (Should make them pay attention).

 

Again, I totally understand if you want to forget the whole thing and settle as soon as.

Any thoughts guys?

[hitman126]

11 hours ago, FTMDave said:

3.  You confirm that your ambiguous statements "on the basis that the above Claim - xxxxxxx - against you is also discontinued" and "there will not be any further action from our office in relation to this matter" mean that your client is withdrawing their invoices dated
   02/02/2019
   16/02/2019
   18/04/2019
   29/04/2019
   31/07/2020
   20/08/2020.

 

@FTMDave, perhaps the only slight issue of concern for me regarding your draft letter is on the

insertion of the above dates. 

 

On their original PoC, they stated that the 6 PCNs were issue on 02/02/2019 and 16/02/2019 (5x). 

 

They then deceitfully sent me some lousy revised PoC, this time with hand-written date amendments

to four of the five 16/02/2019 date entries. Mind you, this revised PoC was never officially submitted 

to the court...........and if you ask my opinion on that, I reckon that was probably because they couldn't

afford or wanted to avoid the additional court cost that change would entail.

 

As far as the court and myself are therefore concerned, we only have official knowledge and/or visibility

of two PCN dates only - 02/02/2019 and 16/02/2019.

 

My slight concern therefore is that by stating those 6 dates, as per your draft letter, are we then not 

perhaps acknowledging the legitimacy or validity of those PCNs?

 

Would it therefore be best letting them confirm firstly in writing, the full list of PCNs relating to the claim

they're offering to to withdraw? If it is then consistent with the dates in your draft letter, great!! If it isn't,

then we query the discrepancies and demand that any date from their handwritten list that is missing,

gets included.

 

Your thoughts?

 

[hitman126]

15 minutes ago, Nicky Boy said:

all PCN's to date"

 

On the back of my last post, I think I very much like the look of this wording.

 

".......all PCN's to date and I demand this to be confirmed in writing."

[brassnecked]

Bear in mind if they have 6 years to bring a claim, so they should keep that data like PCN etc for 6 years, if they delete or otherwise lose that data due to inadequate data backup protocols and cannot prove they have evidence, then they should cease and desist.  They might be advised to drop all claims against Hitman. they are just digging a deeper hole if they persist.

[FTMDave]

It's great you have the initiative and they are on the back foot.  This needs to continue.  There is the weekend now to fine tune things and make sure they are hit Monday morning when they go into the office.

 

That said, in the midst of all the euphoria, IMO you should still tread carefully.  This all started out as a case where (a) they could probably prove some overstays and (b) the sheer volume of invoices may well have led the judge, who generally tries to show they are being fair to both parties, to allow at least some of them.  If you can really beat off a claim for nearly a grand and a half that would be one hell of a result.  Let's not go OTT. 

 

Point taken about my list of PCNs, which may well be wrong, we don't even know if they exist let alone what dates they are-

 

On 26/01/2023 at 13:39, hitman126 said:

Would it therefore be best letting them confirm firstly in writing, the full list of PCNs relating to the claim

they're offering to to withdraw?

I like this.

 

On 26/01/2023 at 13:41, hitman126 said:

".......all PCN's to date and I demand this to be confirmed in writing."

I like this too.

[Nicky Boy]

Also, I believe there's a cut off date to pay or apply for set aside? So timing your pre action/ demand letter/email correctly could put some real pressure on them to agree to your terms...