Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The NTK needs to be redacted, your VRN is still showing.
    • Hi, yes they swapped over after a brief period when the bank were sending something over.
    • Fair enough. But I don't understand why they send these letters. Do people really get scared and end up paying them?
    • That's a blessed relief. They would have been withdrawn because, as I said, they have no evidence that you were driving. That comes from the responses to the requests for driver's details which you failed to send. The important thing is that the speeding charges were laid. That makes life much easier (and far more likely to see a successful outcome). You need to make your SD and serve it on the court where you were convicted. The next you should hear is by way of a "Single Justice Procedure Notice" laying the four charges against you again. You will have three options (for each charge): Plead Guilty and do not attend court Plead guilty and attend court Plead not guilty You must plead Not Guilty to all charges. In the section headed “reason for not guilty plea” you can state that you will offer to plead guilty to the speeding charging providing, and only providing, the FtP charges are dropped. This is a procedure well known to all court users (prosecutors, magistrates and their legal advisors) and is carried out up and down the land daily. I’ll refer to it as “the deal”. Before the pandemic it was necessary to attend court to undertake this deal and speak to the prosecutor (the agreement of the prosecutor is required as the court cannot accept it without that agreement).  However, during the pandemic courts aimed to reduce the numbers of people required to attend to an absolute minimum and most courts accepted a written request to do the deal. Local police prosecutors made an agreement with their courts that the magistrates’ legal advisors could accept the deal. In some areas this arrangement has carried on. In others they have reverted to the old process where attendance was required. So your offer of the “deal” with either be accepted in writing and dealt with under the Single Justice procedure or you may have to attend court. In either event it is important to emphasise that you will plead guilty to speeding only if the FtP charges are dropped.  There may be slight variations to the process depending on how the individual area works but there is no reason why this should not be successful.    
    • Yes thank you dx, my sentiments exactly.  We don't have access to his credit report to see the CCJ.  We were just told by the Estate Agency who he was trying to act as a guarantor for me.......  I can get a free one for a month I believe.  
  • 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

Should company disclose email content on DSAR request


sxam
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 253 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

Not sure if this is the correct place to post, please move if not.

I recently sent a DSAR request to one of the expert witnesses who briefly got involved with my rather complex case. He was approached by my solicitor who no longer represents me. I wanted to see what communication they have had about me.

The company has sent me DSAR details with just the date and time them and my solicitor had the communication (mostly via email) and is refusing to disclose the content saying ICO website states: “The right of access enables individuals to obtain their personal data rather than giving them the right to see copies of documents containing their personal data “.

My question is - should they disclose everything including email content or they can get away with just the date and time of the communication they have had?

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In principle I would have thought that they had a duty to disclose to you.

The quote that you have posted from the ICO website is a bit unclear – to a certain extent although I suppose it means that you don't have to have the actual documents as long as the contents of it are disclosed.
In other words they can tell you what the email contains referring to you – but not the actual email. – A very thin line I would say.

What about telling us the story and of importance, which company is it that is trying to withhold this information from you

You should also send an SAR to your solicitor.

I would also make a complaint to the ICO about it and they may return a view that the DPA has probably been breached – and that would be helpful to you.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a rather very complex case that started around 2018/2019 ( so I will keep it short) where the company I work for has been sued by the liquidator. The claim is for just over a couple of millions. The solicitors we had is one of the biggest law firms in London. I will not mention the name here.

We had the option to get an expert opinion on the case with court permission however our solicitor approached a QC and an expert witness (without discussing fees with us) without obtaining court permission. QC and Expert Withness billed us (via Solicitor) in the region of £50k for their advice. The solicitor will not disclose those advice and expert reports to us until the company pays them. Then we were embroiled in a rather ugly argument and the solicitor pulled out of the case reasoning non-payment fees. Now company/boss is self-litigating as the boss has no money to find another solicitor and already spent over £500k just on different fees.

I am trying to help where I can. So we sent DSAR to QC, the expert witness, and the solicitor. The solicitor asked for more time, QC and WI both sent DSAR but none of them disclosed the content in the email between them and the solicitor. I also asked for copies of the invoice and the description of the invoice it relates to. They both said they were instructed by my solicitor and I have to request this from my solicitor. I  have a feeling they all three spoke to each other since our DSAR and are now finding a way to hide exactly what went on between them. I think they saw the company and boss as a cash cow. I recently found out that the biggest lack of negligence from the solicitor is they didn't even respond to the PAP sent by the liquidator. The case's final hearing is towards the beginning of next year.

Edited by sxam
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it is complicated by understand that you are trying to help somebody else in this is not directly for you.

What's not entirely clear is exactly what information are you trying to obtain?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am now heavily involved in the case and I worked with the company for over 22 years, I take this case very personally.

Reason for DSAR is we are building a case against the solicitor and we wanted to see what sort of communication they have had and how the solicitor explained our case to them. 

We are planning to sue the solicitor for their negligence and for wrongly making a part 20 claim against our Accountant. They made the judgment that the collapse of the company was due to the accounting firm that did the restructuring plan a few months before the company collapsed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So has the solicitor been paid? I would have thought that you would be entitled to the entire file including all correspondence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...