Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Good luck today, TD. Please let us know how it goes. HB
    • That is different to my PCN issued by Highview. I am not by any means an expert so I would leave it to the experts to check what I say and maybe delete this if it is not helpful. My thoughts on this are In the PoC they state you are liable as Driver or Keeper. Firstly, I would challenge that .... are they pursuing you as Driver or as Keeper? They don't know who the driver is, as stated on the NTK and, they don't know if you didn't tell them, so I would think that they can not pursue you as the driver. The NTK is not fully compliant with POFA 2012 as LFI stated but specifically, and correct me if I am wrong, Section 9 [2][f] states that:   Section 9 (2) The notice MUST— (f) warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given— (i) the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and (ii) the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;   All the applicable conditions under this Schedule (Schedule 4) are NOT met, specifically warning the keeper as in (f) .... As far as I can see, the creditor has NOT warned the keeper on the NTK, as they MUST do in accordance with S9 [2](f). So, as far as I can see that prohibits them from having the right to recover from the keeper.   I put it to you M'Lord, given the facts stated, the creditor does not have grounds to pursue the Driver, nor the Keeper!! 😂🤣😂 Maybe that's why you've not heard from the courts, what does it say on MCOL ?
    • at the time, if both owners signed a voluntary charge it can not be a restriction k.  but it looks like one? as above ..... if you re mortgage with the same lender is doesn't need paying if you re mortgage with a new lender then most probably you will have to settle it.
    • The move comes after Tesla reported a sharp fall in its deliveries in the first three months of 2024.View the full article
    • please dont post up unredated court docs!! done now... it looks like: you paid for then cancelled a PC from mac group ltd however the PC still got delivered but not to you. you got issued a court claim but totally ignored it. DCBL HCEO Bailiffs attempted to enforce the CCJ...they failed..you had moved. The Claimant was Granted Permission by the Court to Serve A Statutory Demand and latterly did so. you had attempted to set aside the Original CCJ but failed to attend it's hearing and it got struck out you subsequently have have received a statutory demand for the CCJ sum. you applied to set that aside there was a hearing on 18th Apr which you did not attend. ...............   not quite sure but i think thats the story. ............. same as your other thread.. stop worrying about the house.. you ought to deal with this at some point as if the claimant does go for and manage to you BK. it might not be good. have a think about things , it might pay you to look toward putting an N245 variation to the court and offer a very low £PCM to the court, esp if you have little to no income etc like on benefits/pensioner etc...you might even get it all done for free as there is a small charge for the N245 process.        
  • 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

Trade Centre uk/Startline Motor Finance - and Jonathan Hall, DWF Law - solicitor (apparently)


Recommended Posts

This is what was sent....


 

Quote

 

Startline Motor Finance Ltd


DATA PROTECTION REGULATIONS – SUBJECT ACCESS REQUEST

Vehicle Registration: KM66BAU Contract Number: 16917XXX


 

To whom it may concern,

Please supply me with copies of all the data which you hold on me in relation to any matter and in any form and for any period of time.

Please note that I require disclosure of any personal data which you hold on me for the entire period of my dealings with you.

This Subject Access Request includes - but is not limited to any data you hold about me in respect of any matter and held in any form including; statements, notes, screen notes, recordings, internal correspondence and external correspondence. Please note that this Subject Access Request is not limited to the account/reference number mentioned above but that number has been provided purely as a starting reference for you.

Under the new GDPR regime, you must satisfy this data disclosure request as soon as possible and in any event within one month.

If there is specific information which you require in order to satisfy yourself as to my identity, please let me know by return however, you are not entitled to impose any formality upon me or to require that I complete any particular form or template before you comply with your statutory duty.

I also require you to confirm to me that you are processing my personal data, how you acquired it, for what purpose you are processing it and also to identify all the parties with whom you have shared it. You are required to provide this information regardless of whether you believe that the substantive disclosure satisfies the conditions which permit you to impose a charge.

I also required to know whether my data has been subject to any automatic processing which has resulted in decisions or suggested decisions being made in respect of me. Also, has my personal data been used in any way to categorise me or to place me on any lists. If so please explain.

Finally, I should remind you that you have a duty to make clear the meaning of any codes or shorthand which you use in relation to my personal data.

If I do not hear from you then I will assume that this Statutory Request is satisfactory and that the one month timescale has started.

If you fail to comply with all of your obligations, I will make an immediate complaint to the Information Commissioner about your statutory breach – and without any further notice to you.

This may also lead to legal action in the County Court and a judgement will then be forwarded to the FCA.


 

Yours Sincerely,
 


 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay we will sort out the letter tomorrow. You should post it on Tuesday once they are clearly in breach of the timescale.
I anticipate that they will come back to you and say that they didn't have identity verification – et cetera.

Presumably you are using the same name and address that they are using to hound you for money et cetera

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, you have suggested that you have been having some long-term problems with virgin broadband.
Maybe you should start a new thread and tell us about that as well and we can help you sort it out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, BankFodder said:

Also, you have suggested that you have been having some long-term problems with virgin broadband.
Maybe you should start a new thread and tell us about that as well and we can help you sort it out.

If I started a thread on all the injustices I am dealing with I would need to employ you as my personal legal advisor 🤣🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the broadband problem is clearly having a great effect on your ability to deal with the threats on this forum. As a result it is causing extra difficulty and extra work for us – so all of this in addition to your own impulsive nature…

Post up your virgin problem and let's see how quickly we can get it sorted for you. New thread please

Link to post
Share on other sites

How about something like this.
Please check it over. Please suggest any amendments – additions and subtractions or any concerns.

Please let us have a final look at it before you send it out. Don't do your usual stuff of rushing off and wasting the work that we put in.

Please also note that there will be enclosures – in particular the application notice that he put in with his ridiculous and highly improper proposed defence against a particulars of claim which she has never seen.
The enclosures will also include a copy of your response which you sent to him.
 

Quote

Dear Trade Centre uk, dear Startline Motor Finance - and dear Jonathan Hall - apparently a solicitor at DWF law

 

Reference number XXX. Claim number XXX. Vehicle registration number XXX

Jonathan, don't think that simply because you say that a payment has been made to me that that is the end of the matter.
You had better look at the claim form very carefully and also my response.

I now have the incompetent dealership – Trade Centre UK hassling me to collect the vehicle from them – the same one as you well know that they have had for several months. The same one as you well know that they have tried to repair several times and failed.
The same vehicle in respect of which the other incompetent company – StartLine Motor Finance have now been forced to give me a full reimbursement in response to my claim, as you well know.

The same claim which as you well know, you handled so negligently that it went to a default judgement and then you had the cheek to try and threaten me alongside an application notice which you formulated on some imaginary defence despite the fact that you had never seen the claim form.

Jonathan, if you want to exercise a bit of professionalism now, you should advise your clients StartLine Motor Finance to sort this out once and for all.
That means that they should deal with the dealership – which of course there are obliged to do under the law relating to hire purchase agreements.
They should tell the dealership to stop hassling me. To understand that the car now belongs to them again and that they had better sort out some proper repairs before they put it up for sale to their next victim.
You can tell the dealership that I shall be publishing details of the registration number and images of the vehicle together with the faults that I am aware of on the Internet and with a bit of luck, any future purchaser will be made aware before they part with their money.

You should also tell StartLine Motor Finance to formally cancel any agreement with me and frankly you should probably advise them to stop having anything to do with the dealership although probably you all deserve each other.

You had better understand – and you better inform everybody, – that the court action I took to get my money back is only the first and I will take more if necessary against the finance company.
I suppose with the next legal action I take, you would be so negligent and you will deal with it but you will still lose. Not only that, when we go to court, I will make sure that the judge sees everything including the previous particulars of claim, your imaginary defence including your admission of your own negligence in respect of the handling of that matter.


And finally, on 26 January I sent your motor finance company clients a subject access request. No surprises that they failed to respond within the statutory 30 days and so they are now in breach of their statutory duty.
I suppose they will ask you for help. I suppose you will try to say that they were entitled not to respond because I had verified my identity. Of course the name and address for responding to the SAR is exactly the same one that you, your finance company clients and your dealership have all been happy to use when sending me documents, threatening me, making my life miserable – so am telling you now, that if you try the identity verification trick, then I will include that in an action against your clients for their statutory breach of duty and I'm quite sure that the judge will recognise this is simply some stumbling and clumsy attempt to disguise your breach of the SAR obligations under the Data Protection Act.

As it is, your clients are now in breach of their statutory duty. This has caused me a lot of distress as you can imagine. I'm proposing to bring a legal action against your clients.

As your clients are now in breach, they will not be able to undo this breach. It is a fait accompli although they can mitigate it by letting me have the data disclosure without any further delay.
However, in respect of the present breach, I think that £100 payment in respect of their statutory failure is a small sum to pay me in recognition of the distress I have suffered from their failure to provide me with a statutory disclosure so far.

Tell your clients from me that if I do not received both £100 in respect of the statutory breach as it exists at this point in time along with full disclosure of all my personal data within 14 days, that I shall sue them in the County Court and without further notice.

You had better also tell your finance company clients that this will be only the start of the process of sorting out the entire mess that has been created by the dealership, by your clients – and of course by your own negligence.

You seem to be incapable of cleaning it up so I'm going to do it myself.

And here is an update:
I have just received a letter from your clients demanding arrears on the account and purporting to charge me £15 for the letter!
This is despite the fact that they have just been sued and that they have paid me the full amount of the claim.
You couldn't make it up could you?

You had better contact them and tell them to stop being stupid. Furthermore, this is an example of inaccurate data processing and therefore a further breach of the Data Protection Act.
You had better let your clients know what is coming


And as a matter of courtesy to you, I am letting you know that I shall be sending a copy of your application notice to the SRA along with a formal complaint.

Believe me

 

Enclosures:
claim number XXX particulars of claim
application notice including proposed defence.
copy of judgement dated XXX.

CC Hilary Ross, DWF law UK regional managing partner
cc: Solicitors Regulation Authority

As you can see, the final version of this letter should be sent to the dealership, to the finance company, and of course to Jonathan Hall.
Also a copy to the DWF managing partner who as far as I can make out is probably

UK&I Regional Managing Partner
United Kingdom
T:+44 (0)3333 20 32 10
M:+44 (0)7712 899715

I would suggest that you send this letter on 28 February – which is Wednesday. Wait until the afternoon so you can be certain that you don't get anything through the post in the morning.

If you get calls from the dealership then then just say that the matter is in hand and refuse to speak to them.

 

I know that this seems a lot correspondence to send out – but we need to not this on the head. It seems that nobody is talking to anybody. The dealership doesn't know what's going on, the motor finance company doesn't know what's going on, Jonathan Hall certainly doesn't seem to know what's going on.

You have to take control and you need a file which shows that you have informed everybody. The everybody is in the picture.
You will notice that at the bottom we have proposed to take a legal action on the data protection breach in 15 days. You've been through this before so you should find it much easier. It will only be a very small claim to begin with. I think it costs about £35 to begin the claim.

Please be certain that you are prepared to take this action on day 15. As you know it's not a bluff any more.

If you don't like the style of the letter above then modify – but it expresses anger and also this respect. They will never have received a letter like it and that is no accident.

If the letter is not to your taste then please change what you think you need and then let us have the final version.

As usual, we may come up with one or two extra ideas so for once, please don't send it off without running it past us first.

 

Edited by BankFodder
Edits in red
Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, shellyh24 said:

If I do not hear from you then I will assume that this Statutory Request is satisfactory and that the one month timescale has started.

This wording was part of the SAR request BankFodder, so there's no way they can wriggle around the "identity" thing anyway.

I don't know whether you might want to edit the letter.

Might make it a bit shorter?

On the other hand, it might make the letter less caustic, which it seems like you're aiming for...

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I know that my letter is a rather long. It is so easy when one is dictating rather than typing!

I'm afraid that visiting a unilateral assumption on the other side is not good enough to trigger a statutory obligation.
I think it is important to spell out the verification issue so that it is clear that it has been anticipated and it is clear what will happen if they try to go down that route.

And yes, caustic is a good description. I'm afraid it tends to be my style quite often nowadays – but anyway, I think they will need a wake-up call and to realise that simply because they are dealing with an ordinary consumer, doesn't mean that they can get away with this kind of bullying treatment – which she has been receiving to date.
Part of what we do on the CAG is to even up the odds.

  • I agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So my internet is due to be fixed tomorrow morning. I have an engineer coming out to repair the connection. I have almost run out of data on my phone!! 

So I will deal with the letters to all parties when i have my computer wednesday morning. 

Update as of today (Monday)..
No new email from Jonathan Hall....
A letter from Startline charging me £15 per letter they send me now asking me to pay the arrears on the account! 
An email from Startline stating they have not registered a default and if I want to keep the car I need to ring them and communicate with them..... which i laughed far too hard at!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if for some reason rather your Internet is not repaired, you had better find a solution to your data problem because things are going to become critical if you can't start dealing with this and engaging properly so that you can take control.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the basis of your update informing us that you have now received a letter for which they are charging you £15, I have made an amendment to the proposed letter above. It is in red.

Please tell us that you haven't rushed off and sent the letter already before checking with us for the final version.

The letter should be sent tomorrow – but check with us first.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

so im back with my computer working! there was a fault on the line between the road and my house, such joy....

anyways, so im about the start doing these letters..... 

I cant see an amendment in red... i will draft out the one a few posts up that you did...

Edited by shellyh24
Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying that you can't see the amendment to the draft letter which I posted above on Sunday at 10.23?

Quote

image.png

are you telling us that you can't see the letter in that post at all?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Click the expand button on the quote :-D

 

 

.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I have proof read and have a letter drafted, i have obviously left out the reference numbers but here it is...

 

Dear Trade Centre uk,
Dear Startline Motor Finance,
and Dear Jonathan Hall -
 apparently a solicitor at DWF law

 

Reference number XXX. Claim number XXX. Vehicle registration number XXX

Jonathan, don't think that simply because you say that a payment has been made to me that that is the end of the matter.
You had better look at the claim form very carefully and also my response.

I now have the incompetent dealership – Trade Centre UK hassling me to collect the vehicle from them – the same one as you well know, have had it for several months already. The same one as you well know that have tried to repair several times and failed.
The same vehicle in respect of which the other incompetent company – Startline Motor Finance have now been forced to give me a full reimbursement in response to my claim, as you well know.

The same claim which as you well know, you handled so negligently that it went to a default judgement and then you had the cheek to try and threaten me alongside an application notice which you formulated on some imaginary defence despite the fact that you had never seen the claim form.

Jonathan, if you want to exercise a bit of professionalism now, you should advise your clients Startline Motor Finance to sort this out once and for all.
That means that they should deal with the dealership – which of course there are obliged to do under the law relating to hire purchase agreements.
They should tell the dealership to stop hassling me. To understand that the car now belongs to them again and that they had better sort out some proper repairs before they put it up for sale to their next victim.
You can tell the dealership that I shall be publishing details of the registration number and images of the vehicle together with the faults that I am aware of on the
Internet and with a bit of luck, any future purchaser will be made aware before they part with their money.

You should also tell Startline Motor Finance to formally cancel any agreement with me and frankly you should probably advise them to stop having anything to do with the dealership although probably you all deserve each other.

You had better understand – and you better inform everybody, – that the court action I took to get my money back is only the first and I will take more if necessary against the finance company.
I suppose with the next legal action I take, you may not be so negligent and you will deal with it but you will still lose. Not only that, when we go to court, I will make sure that the judge sees everything including the previous
particulars of claim, your imaginary defence including your admission of your own negligence in respect of the handling of that matter.

And finally, on 26 January I sent your motor finance company clients a subject access request. No surprises that they failed to respond within the statutory 30 days and so they are now in breach of their statutory duty.
I suppose they will ask you for help. I suppose you will try to say that they were entitled not to respond because I had not verified my identity. Of course the name and address for responding to the SAR is exactly the same one that you, your finance company clients and your dealership have all been happy to use when sending me documents, threatening me, making my life miserable – so I am telling you now, that if you try the identity verification trick, then I will include that in an action against your clients for their statutory breach of duty and I'm quite sure that the judge will recognise this is simply some stumbling and clumsy attempt to disguise your breach of the SAR obligations under the Data Protection Act.

As it is, your clients are now in breach of their statutory duty. This has caused me a lot of distress as you can imagine. I'm proposing to bring a legal action against your clients.

As your clients are now in breach, they will not be able to undo this breach. It is a fait accompli although they can mitigate it by letting me have the data disclosure without any further delay.
However, in respect of the present breach, I think that £100 payment in respect of their statutory failure is a small sum to pay me in recognition of the distress I have suffered from their failure to provide me with a statutory disclosure so far.

Tell your clients from me that if I do not received both £100 in respect of the statutory breach as it exists at this point in time along with full disclosure of all my personal data within 14 days, that I shall sue them in the
County Court and without further notice.

You had better also tell your finance company clients that this will be only the start of the process of sorting out the entire mess that has been created by the dealership, by your clients – and of course by your own negligence.

You seem to be incapable of cleaning it up, you have had over a week already since the payment was made, so I'm going to do it myself.

 

And here is an update: I have just received a letter from your clients demanding arrears on the account are paid and charging me £15 per letter! This is despite the fact they have just been sued and have paid out the claim!
You had better contact them and tell them to stop being stupid! Furthermore this is an example of an inaccurate date processing and therefore a breach of the data protection act. You had better inform you clients what is coming.


And as a matter of courtesy to you, I am letting you know that I shall be sending a copy of your application notice to the SRA along with a formal complaint.

 

 

Enclosures:
claim number XXX 
particulars of claim
application notice including proposed defence.
copy of judgement dated XXX.

CC Hilary Ross, DWF law UK regional managing partner
cc: Solicitors Regulation Authority

 

Edited by shellyh24
Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay – I had misread your post above.

The draft letter is fine.

I suggest that you send it off to each one of the recipients. Make sure that you have a full set of the enclosures for each one so that everybody is in the loop completely.

I notice that I missed out the dealership in the copies. Send a copy to the dealership as well with a full set of enclosures.

That means that everybody gets a letter +3 enclosures.

In fact I suddenly realise that I haven't advise you to enclose your own response as well – the one that you sent to Jonathan Hall in response to his application notice
this should be sent as well so that means that there are four enclosures.

You will see that in the complaint letter to the SRA I have referred specifically to that one as well.

Sorry to cause confusion. Please will you let us know that you understand.


We will do a brief letter to the SRA – by way of a covering letter.

Complaint letter to the SRA

 

Quote

Dear Sir/Mdm

Complaint about Jonathan Hall, solicitor – DWF law

Please see the enclosures. They should explain everything.
Although I am not a client of DWF law, you will see that I issue the claim against their clients on XXX date. Despite the fact that that the defendants passed the claim on to Jonathan Hall of DWF law, he failed to take any action with the result that I was able to obtain a judgement.

It seems that Jonathan Hall then became aware of the claim and of the judgement but rather than dealing with it correctly, father application notice to the court including the details of a proposed defence – all signed as a statement of truth – even though he had never seen the particulars of claim and his proposed defence – backed by a statement of truth – was merely an imagined construction.
He then threatened me and it was only when I eventually responded with the response which I have attached, that he then conceded the judgement and his clients paid me.
Despite this, he has not advises clients to deal with the matter correctly and despite the fact that they have settled my claim, they are still harassing me for payments and I have no idea why Jonathan Hall has compounded his negligence by failing to advises clients to deal with the matter properly.

Please acknowledge this complaint and provide me with reference number and the timescale for action.



Signed

enclosures:
list the enclosures

cc: Jonathan Hall, DWF law
the dealers
the finance company

please will you confirm that you understand all of this and let us know when you send it off.

I suggest that you keep proof of posting on each one.

It's all a nuisance of course but we are pushing forward with this and making progress – slowly.

Now that you have a good Internet connection – hopefully things will go more smoothly

Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, the purpose of circulating this to everybody is to cause maximum embarrassment and also division between them. If they start arguing between themselves, this will help you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK so letter to

1) Jonathan Hall

2) finance company

3) car dealership

All have 4 enclosures to include: particulars of claim

Claim judgement

Application and proposed defence

My reply emailed to Jonathan Hall

*All will be sent tomorrow recorded.....

 

And then a separate letter to SRA above also to be sent recorded.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great.

It will be very entertaining to see the reaction.

Now are you in the mood for starting a small claim on the basis of their data protection breach – the failure to respond to the subject access request?
You please wait months – and this should be much simpler and much lower risk in terms of cost outlay. I would suggest that if you are up for it that you get ready to issue a claim for £100 for distress for failure to respond to your subject access request.
They would be really stupid to defend it and in fact they would even be stupid to allow it to go through as a claim – but you need to be ready.

The cost of issuing the claim will be £35.

I would also make a complaint to the information Commissioner's office

ICO.ORG.UK

Find out what to do next if you’ve had a problem accessing your personal information from an organisation, or if you’re unhappy about how an...

This will be a very easy complaint to make. You would upload a copy of your subject access request. Information Commissioner won't do much but you will get response and eventually they will come back to you and simply say that there has probably been a breach. They tend not to say anything more than that that this will be good enough if you find that you do have to go beyond simply issuing the claim.

Let us know if you would like to do this. The hundred quid is useful – but the main thing really is to harass them and to emphasise how incompetent they are.
This will stand you in good stead if we have to have further litigation to bring the whole agreement to an end.
 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, if i go through the complaints thing on the Information Commissions Office it says this...

 

We expect individuals to seek a full and final response from an organisation before complaining to us.

You must chase the organisation if you have not received a response.

If you have not done this and you submit a complaint, we will not be able to take it forward.


So given this I will email and ask for a final response with a copy of the original SAR, then they cannot say I skipped this step.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. I had missed that step

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats ok, 

Email sent to Startline just now...

Dear Startline Motor Finance Ltd,
 

Vehicle Registration: KM66BAU Contract Number: 16917235


Back on 26th January I posted a letter with proof of posting asking for any information which you held on me, a Subject Access Request. 
I have waited 30 days and you have not responded which is a breach of your statutory duties under the Data Protection Act.

I would like to ask you for a final response to my request without delay.

I have attached a copy of the original letter for your attention. I would also ask that you action this request as soon as possible and within the next 7 days or I am fully prepared to take you back to Court for this clear breach and the stress you are causing me. 

Regards,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good but send the other letter as well as agreed above together with enclosures

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am currently printing ready to send today.

just checking, im sending the letter which addresses Jonathan Hall to all parties? Do i need to add that this is an FYI or do i change the letter slightly each time>? 

Edited by shellyh24
Link to post
Share on other sites

Send identical letters but use "cc." so that everyone can see who else has received copies.

I don't believe that I have mentioned FYI at all have I?

 

 

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...