EPS breach of GDPR

[Nicky Boy]

Thinking further on my last post, here's a suggestion to possibly do some work on..?

 

The Defendant's application for set aside appears to revolve around a claim of being "confused".

I would refer to the Defendant's witness statement:

 

Paragraphs 10 to 13 set out their obligations regarding the acquisition, storage and distribution of data.

 

Paragraph 14 states that "motorists often submit Subject Access Requests".

 

So, the Defendant claims total familiarity with SAR compliance requirements.

 

The Defendant's Company was incorporated on 30th December 2014, so for nearly 9 years have by their own admission dealt with a large number of SAR requests.

 

It follows that the Defendant's claim of "being confused" is at best  an admission of incompetence and at worst, simply disingenuous.

 

They are attempting to conflate two separate, legitimate claims to create the confusion, which they then seek to rely on.

 

[FTMDave]

@Nicky Boy The repetition was deliberate, to underline the same point at two different stages of the WS, but you're right, and I've cut one out.

 

I don't think the OP can request further costs here.

 

 

[FruitSalad1010]

It is very kind of FTMDave to put together a substantial response in such a short period of time.
 

Quote

 9.  The reason there are two claims for distress is because distress was caused by two different failures by the Defendant.  One caused by the Defendant's breach of GDPR way back in February 2021.  The other for failing to respect the deadline for replying responding to a SAR two years later on 4 January by 4 February 2023.  It was quite proper to send two different Letters of Claim and later to start two different court claims.

I think it best not to emphasise the time between the breach occurring and when the claim for distress was issued.

 

It would be useful if @kfdh1962 could post up the exact particulars they used for the claim which is loosely referred to in this thread as a breach of the GDPR.
 

 

13 hours ago, kfdh1962 said:

fruit salad, yes there are indeed 2 claims and as i read it gladdies have submitted one defence cpvering both claims as i read it

 

i will put together that cronology and post it up

 

My understanding is different to yours, it appears to me you received 1 defence to 1 claim which was for a breach of the GDPR.

You then received one application hoping to deal with both of your claims, however importantly at the top of the draft defence is a redacted claim number.

That claim number will indicate exactly which claim the defence is aimed at and it would be helpful if you could make that clear to us as well.
 

FTMDave is excellent at keeping on top of things but if it were straight forward to do, it may help to create a separate thread for each claim.

[kfdh1962]

to Fruitsalad's point i have read them all again and i agree with the comments,

 

So ,  to clarify the the application notice , witness statement and defence are all referencing  claim number ending 28V which is the claim they failed to respond to in time and for which a warrant has now been issued, this is the claim  being for the non compliance to the SAR,.

 

The other claim is mentioned in these documents only in respect to them being confused by the presence of a second claim. This other claim , ending 20W had an acknowledgement of service and directions questionnaire which contained  a short defence previously shared 

[FTMDave]

So it's time to give a last polish to the statement before sending it to the court and the fleecers on Tuesday.

 

You know the score with WSs - the bit about the parties at the start, the Statement of Truth at the end, the numbering, etc.

[kfdh1962]

. i will put it together later and share for comment , thanks for the work on this ftmd and to everyone else for their comments 

[kfdh1962]

everything completed now and ready to go , thanks for all the work by FTMdave  which took care of most of it

 

Just wanted to check where i send this . I noticed the fleecers sent the application to CCBC, defence witness statement sent to Birmingham county court. Am i right in assuming Birmingham , which is where the warrant was sent for execution. ?

Edited May 1, 2023 by kfdh1962
type o

[FTMDave]

OK, the statement was tweaked several times so make sure it's the last version which I see was changed on Saturday at 17:54.  Include FruitSalad's suggested changes.

 

I forgot to mention to make Exhibit 3 two pages, a screenshot of the fleecers' web page with the data protection e-mail address and also the bounce back mail.

 

Good point.  I'm 99.99% certain the court will be Birmingham after reading the fleecers' bilge.  But I'll flag this up to the site team just to make sure.

[dx100uk]

its whichever court the fleecers sent their n244 too surely? Northants bulk i would assume? as that where the default judgement was gained, same as anyone here getting a backdoor CCJ, you file the N244 to northants bulk, then it gets allocated out.?

cant see you've had a notice of allocation or a directions order to another one?

 

 

[FTMDave]

Confirmed by a Site Team member who knows a hell of a lot more than me - Birmingham.

[kfdh1962]

i posted everything off to Birmingham county court on Tuesday with proof of postage. just wondered if ia m required to pott a copy to the solicitors

[dx100uk]

yes cant hurt

[AndyOrch]

Its a given if you want the court to accept your statement of objection....file and serve.

[kfdh1962]

will get a copy in the post to them tomorrow then 

[FTMDave]

Nothing from the court about a set aside date?

 

I'm thinking you should send a second LoC for continuing distress as they still haven't respected the SAR.

 

It would mean that, if (hopefully when) their set aside application is chucked in the bin, that you could sue them a third time.

 

 

[kfdh1962]

nothing received as of yesterday from the courts ref set aside 

[FTMDave]

Courts usually, though not always, are pretty quick with set aside hearings.

 

However, at the moment all is in a state of limbo waiting for the set aside application to be considered.

 

Nothing stopping a new LoC going off though.

[FTMDave]

Any update?

[FTMDave]

Any news here?

[FTMDave]

So what is happening - or not happening - with this case?

Following @MoaningCrusader's success, there are a little group of Caggers taking what are almost "test cases" against the PPCs for GDPR and/or SAR distress cases.

It would be extremely useful to others to know what stage your case is at.

 

[dx100uk]

last visited 26th may?