CEL Default CCJ appeared on my file- person with similar name ***Credit Rating Restored***

[Nicky Boy]

Maybe post up your draft here for the team to review first?

[Concerned From Essex]

Post 171 has the original draft...but here is the current one. Thank you  

Thank you for your letter of 21 February 2024.

I will not deal with all of the points raised here as I have adequately set out my grounds for the claim in my letter dated 09 February 2024 .  I will, however, add that you did cause a delay by only taking action once I had contacted your associates, DCBL.  This is evident in your email reply to me on the 24 January 2024 which stated We have been contacted by DCBL with regards to matter you have outlined in your complaint. My “complaint”, as you are aware, was raised through your online portal on the 24 January 2024 chasing my original letter of the 15 January 2024, which went ignored.

Through no fault of my own, this whole matter has caused me a great deal of stress, worry and time. I deny that I failed to mitigate my loss.  However, even if that were the case, it would be an admission that I suffered a loss and that it was caused by you through misuse of my personal data.

I refer to the Data Protection principles. It is my view that you have breached at least 5 of the 8 principles in that you used my address unfairly and unlawfully; you used it in a way that was inadequate, irrelevant and excessive; you failed to use it in an accurate way through serving court papers on the basis of a probability; you have kept my address on record for over a year which was longer than necessary since all letters were sent back were clearly marked that the individual was “not known at this address”. Subsequently, you have failed to handle my data in accordance with my data protection rights.

As I have explained, I would prefer to settle this amicably then take legal action and I am replying to give your company the chance to propose a sensible counteroffer in order to compensate me for the flagrant misuse of my personal data, which you have admitted to in writing.

[FTMDave]

Looks good to me.

It can't harm you to send it.

[lookinforinfo]

Two things Concerned.

the first is a minor one as there is a small misprint

As I have explained, I would prefer to settle this amicably thAn take legal action ...

The second is a serious breach of your GDPR. There has to be a "reasonable cause" to access the DVLA database. As you do not have a car with the registration number  that was involved in the alleged breach there was no reasonable cause  for an enquiry to be made in your name.

[Concerned From Essex]

Thanks both.

I don't think that CEL made an enquiry in my actual name with the DVLA. DCBL wrote to the right person first and when they had no reply from that address, the match was made to my address because the person had a similar name to me. This information was then passed over to CEL from DCBL after they used their "trusted" tracing company. The DVLA have confirmed that my name is not associated with the car (as expected!). 

This has just reminded me that I need to reply to DCBL's letter in response to my SAR...I will do that today.

[lookinforinfo]

Thank you for that explanation. So the DVLA was not involved in providing your name to Trace/DCBL.

[FTMDave]

What date did you send the SARs to Smart and to DRP?

Their deadline can't be far away.

It's important they're clobbered too otherwise this whole credit file mess will just start again at some point.

It also means that, should you decide in the end not to pursue CEL, that you will have alternative targets to wreak vengeance on

 

[Concerned From Essex]

No, no DVLA involvement, just the tracing company once the individual could not be contacted at the address the car was registered to.

The other SARs were sent on the 5 Feb, so not too far off. Yes, that's my worry. My address has wrongly been associated with this individual/vehicle twice since 2019. The only good thing is that I now have all this proof that I'm nothing to do with it (!) plus, when you search the vehicle via the DVLA/Gov website, it no longer comes up. So assume its been scrapped!? I know its not got a current MOT as the last one was Sept 2023.

[Concerned From Essex]

I've sent my response letter, so will let you all know when/if they reply...

[FTMDave]

Any update here?

From CEL?

From Smart or DRP re the SARSs?

[Concerned From Essex]

Hello

No, nothing from CEL yet (although I do wonder if they will reply). DBCL confirmed in writing that they had erased anything to do with me/my data following the SAR. Smart and DRP have not replied to my SAR. I gave them last week in case anything came through the post, but nothing. Its now over the month deadline, so what action can I take with them???

Edited March 11 by Concerned From Essex

[FTMDave]

I think CEL have called your bluff.

You now have a choice of
   - drop the matter
   - sue for £3500
   - sue for an open amount and let the judge decide.

If you decide on the third option you will need to do some reading up as I believe these cases are a bit more complicated.

You've had conflicting advice from the regulars which is no bad thing as we have very few cases like yours and it's good to weigh up different opinions.

It was great that you got rid of the CCJ so quickly from your credit file but on the other hand ironically it makes it more difficult to sue CEL who did right their wrong.

I get the impression that you're up for revenge so the good news is that you can sue both Smart and DRP for a couple of hundred quid each for distress for not respecting your SAR.  We have experience with this and it's straightforward.  The next step would be to send them a Letter of Claim, which would also serve as a reminder of the SAR so they couldn't pretend they knew nothing about it and could also mention their misuse of your address while pursuing a debt so you have a paper record that they have ben told yet again and have done nowt.

Have a think about if you want to do this.

Here is an example of someone who did, and won, and which includes a template LoC  https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/452147-loc-to-ncp-for-failure-to-supply-sar-paid-in-full/#comments

Some Caggers haven't had it so easy though and we would like you to read those threads too, but firstly decide if you want to sue Smart and DRP.

[lookinforinfo]

You could also  complain to the ICO about their lack of a reply to your claim that your GDPR has been breached. That will take longer to get a  response from them than probably from the court

[Concerned From Essex]

Thanks both, I'll take a look at the links and all the information on the SAR. I certainly haven't ruled out writing to the ICO about the whole matter. Trying to get to the tracing company is my main aim now, so a follow up to Smart and DRP wont be a bad idea. I'm so appreciative of all the advice this group has given me. I would never have got this far I'm sure  

I'll keep  you all posted!

[Concerned From Essex]

Hi all..

.I've been having a think and I am going to draw a line under everything now.

I just wanted to say thank you again to everyone for all your help and support.

This forum is invaluable and I'll continue to take an active interest in all the cases you are dealing with.

You really do help a lot of people, who otherwise would be at a loss (like me)!

Of course...if CEL ever reply to me, you'll be the first to know  

[lookinforinfo]

Thanks for letting us know your decision. 

It's never easy coming to a conclusion like this and you have taken time to take all matters into consideration. 

Time being an important one. I wish you luck and hopefully you won't park in a CEL car park for a while.

I believe you have six years to make a case so  you can change your mind. 

[FTMDave]

Yes, thanks for coming back and letting us know your decision.

Nothing bad will happen to you re the Smart case, because unlike CEL Smart don't do court.

However, if Smart or any of the other vile PPCs ever write to you again, please come back here.

[Concerned From Essex]

Hello all.

So back in January when I was complaining to all and sundry about the CCJ, I wrote to the courts.

I'd completely forgotten about it as I didn't think I would get a response.

today I had an email which included the below.

The last paragraph is very interesting and not sure if it will lead to anything, but I guess its good that the error has been raised to the judge??

What do we think?

According to the Court record this case was paid on 25 January 2024 which is within one month since the Judgment was entered.

I can confirm that the court records have been updated to mark the Judgment as 'cancelled'. 

Once the judgment is marked as cancelled, the Registry Trust is notified electronically via an overnight link.

The Trust then updates the Register of Judgments in line with their work positions.

Once this is done, then the credit reference agencies are informed.

The agencies are responsible for updating their own credit files, and the court has no control over when this is done.

In regards to your query regarding the name,

I've considered the effect this has had on you and referred the matter to a District Judge on 13 March 2024.

Please be advised due to our current turnout, cases may take 7 - 10 working days to come back form the Judge. 

 

[lookinforinfo]

We'll cross our fingers and wait expectantly with baited breath. i can't see how they can brush that under the carpet.

 

[FTMDave]

On 18/03/2024 at 10:34, Concerned From Essex said:

According to the Court record this case was paid on 25 January 2024 which is within one month since the Judgment was entered.

I can confirm that the court records have been updated to mark the Judgment as 'cancelled'. 

Once the judgment is marked as cancelled, the Registry Trust is notified electronically via an overnight link.

Interesting.

I doubt very much that Miss XXXXX paid the CCJ as she didn't even know it existed.

CEL will have had to tell the court it was paid and put up with losing the money - what a shame.

NOT!

Surreally it's likely that Miss XXXXX was taken to court, lost the case by default, had judgement entered against her and had the judgement satisfied - while being blissfully unaware of the whole thing.

Edited March 21 by FTMDave
Typo

[Concerned From Essex]

I did find it interesting that the court said it was "paid" yet CEL told me they asked for it to be "removed without trace"....maybe just terminology but if they have mislead the court in any way, without telling them about the error of issuing the CCJ to right person at the wrong address and as a result getting the CCJ applied to the homeowner of said wrong address...maybe there will be more scope for action from me...

Yes the actual person never knew anything about this and I ended up taking the wrap for her and sorted it out!!

[lookinforinfo]

If you think that they won't pursue the other driver think again. They will want to get some money back from their MAJOR BLUNDER.

[Concerned From Essex]

So a letter came through from the court yesterday with the judge's review...

The letter was not addressed to me, but to the person the CCJ was for....

The judge said "The court doesn't conduct litigation by correspondence. The issue MUST be taken up with the claimant. The complainant should take legal advice on the procedure of applying to have the incorrect judgement removed/set aside."

...

[lookinforinfo]

That was a bit of a dampener. Though I was surprised that the Court was getting involved. Now I realise that they are just informing you of the situation and letting you know that the person who should have received the CCJ is still on the hook for it even though they have appeared to have been out of the loophole for some time.  Not going to be nice reading for them..................