Would like to sue Management Company for DPA 1998 BREACH

[R0b]

Looks good enough, all I can say is good luck on the vicarious liability with the management company.

You'll have to prove that the relationship was akin to employment as opposed to a contract for services and that (if as you say) the management co. had control over the parking co. such that they had to authorise any claims.

[Sassii]

Hi Again

Claim Form been issued & would like to ask what will happen if only one Defendant replied and did the AOS and the other not?, can I ask for a judgement against the one didn't reply for the full amount of claim?.

Regards

[Sassii]

Looks good enough, all I can say is good luck on the vicarious liability with the management company.

Now Management company (2nd defendant) didn't respond to the Claim Form but parking company (1st defendant) did and filed his defence as 1st defendant.

Can I ask for Default Judgement against the Management Company only?

Regards

[R0b]

Now Management company (2nd defendant) didn't respond to the Claim Form but parking company (1st defendant) did and filed his defence as 1st defendant.

Can I ask for Default Judgement against the Management Company only?

Regards

The answer is generally yes, assuming the claim can proceed against the other defendant - see CPR 12.8 below

[Sassii]

The answer is generally yes, assuming the claim can proceed against the other defendant - see CPR 12.8 below

Hi

After filed form n225 10 days ago to court asking to enter Judgement against Management Company (2nd Defendant), after Parking Company filed there defence and after I served N180 form to both defendants. Just received a letter from the Management Company saying they didn't receive the Claim Form or Particulars of the Claim and asking me to serve it to them and they just knew about that claim after received 1st Defendant defence.

I didn't think the management company saying the truth as the court send to me a letter confirming that the Claim Form been served to Defendant and the Management Company didn't reply to my LBC although they confirmed receiving of it.

Of course I don't have a copy of the Claim Form as it's only served by court to defendants, so What the right thing I have to do while waiting for court decision for order against 2nd Defendant.

Regards

[R0b]

Have you contacted the court to confirm on their records that the claim form was issued to the correct address? That would be the starting point.

It does seem strange that they somehow receive the 1st Defendant's defence and also and your LBC but not the Claim Form. Wouldn't surprise me if they ignored it or someone didn't pass it on to the right person, but as long as it has been validly served, then they don't have much of a leg to stand on. They would need to make an application to set aside the default judgment.

You could keep your response short by saying that you've confirmed with the court that the Claim Form was issued on X date and to the address given on their letter, so as far as you are concerned, the Claim Form was validly served on them and its up to them to prove that it wasn't received.

If you've already applied for default judgment you could tell them that and if they want to set it aside, then they will need to make an application following receipt of the default judgment (or you could consent, up to you).

[Sassii]

If you've already applied for default judgment you could tell them that and if they want to set it aside, then they will need to make an application following receipt of the default judgment (or you could consent, up to you).

A month ago the court postponed the decision for default Judgement against 2nd Defendant (Management Company) up to the hearing with the first Defendant. so the 2nd Management company used that chance to submit relief from sanction application and used it as a back door to put there defence foreword and asking to strike out the main claim and me to pay the application fees.

I finished with my witness statement for hearing for that application and will put it here tomorrow morning with Management Company application.

Regards

[Sassii]

It does seem strange that they somehow receive the 1st Defendant's defence and also and your LBC but not the Claim Form. Wouldn't surprise me if they ignored it or someone didn't pass it on to the right person, but as long as it has been validly served, then they don't have much of a leg to stand on. They would need to make an application to set aside the default judgment.

That is the second defendant application:

http://www.keepandshare.com/doc16/vi...?id=23771&da=y


and that is my WS draft for that.Could please review and comment . Highly Appreciate your help

Claimant’s Witness Statement
For 2^nd Defendant’s Relief from Sanction application hearing on

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT

CLAIM No:

BETWEEN:

(Claimant)

-and-

(2^nd Defendant)


I am xxxx and I am the Claimant in this matter. I am representing myself due to the cost of a solicitor and due to this I request some leeway.

1. This is the Claimant’s Witness Statement for the court hearing dated xxxx allocated for second Defendant’s relief from sanction application.

1. The Claim was issued via the County Court Business Centre (Money Claim Online) which is a procedure specifically provided for in the Civil Procedure Rules and as the second Defendant’s name been stated in Court Notice of Issue, Defendant (s) section, (Exhibit ps/1), the Claimant believes that the second Defendant been issued with the Claim form including Particulars of Claim by the Court like the first Defendant so the second Defendant argument about he been excluding from service as the word ‘’defendant’’ in the Notice of Issue does not ended with ‘’s’’ and its assumption that the word ‘’ defendant’’ means only first defendant have no evidence and meaningless.

1. Adding to the above that the second Defendant did not reply to the Claimant’s Letter Before Claim although confirmed receiving, Also second Defendant admitted in its Defence point 5.1 that he knew about the Claim from the first Defendant’s defence dated xxxx, five days before acknowledgment of service deadline date xxxx, but chose to ignore, miss that date and do nothing up to xxxx, (point 5.3), eleven days after his alleged awareness and six days after deadline date, and also chose to miss the defence’s filing deadline date xxxx.

1. The Claimant asks the court to dismiss the second Defendant’s relief from sanction application and apply the strict principles set out in Denton v TH White Ltd [2014] (Denton’s test) (Exhibit ps/8) by the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) as the second Defendant did not provide good reason of why missed the deadline dates to file the acknowledgment of service or the Defence although had the chances to file them but chose to ignore, do nothing and using its own time frame which would appear to have been negligence on its part and not as a result of anything else, least of all in connection with anything Claimant did or failed to do. There are no proof for the reasons or the assumption mentioned in the application / Defence.
2. The fact that second Defendant negligence, particularly such errors in the context of a party that is professionally represented, is not a good reason to relief from sanction specifically after that been addressed in Denton v TH White Ltd [2014] (Exhibit ps/8), in which the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) said ‘’ But mere overlooking a deadline, whether on account of overwork or otherwise, is unlikely to be a good reason. We understand that solicitors may be under pressure and have too much work. It may be that this is what occurred in the present case. But that will rarely be a good reason. Solicitors cannot take on too much work and expect to be able to persuade a court that this is a good reason for their failure to meet deadlines. They should either delegate the work to others in their firm or, if they are unable to do this, they should not take on the work at all. This may seem harsh especially at a time when some solicitors are facing serious financial pressures. But the need to comply with rules, practice directions and court orders is essential if litigation is to be conducted in an efficient manner’’.
   
   The Court of Appeal also has held that the stricter approach to compliance with rules and directions made under the CPR, set out in Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2014] 1 W.L.R. 795 (Exhibit ps/8), and Denton v TH White Ltd [2014] 1 W.L.R. 3926, applies equally to other cases, e.g. in The Claimant v The first Defendant case no. xxxx The Judge xxxx dismissed the first defendant set aside application after applying Denton’s Test.

1. It is the responsibility of the second Defendant & its Solicitor to be aware of the Court deadlines and to comply with them. The Claimant should not be prejudiced by an (apparently) negligent failure from the second Defendant or its solicitor where admitted it was aware about the claim before the deadline dates.

1. The second Defendant could at least contact its contractor, the first Defendant, or the Court immediately once received the first defendant’s defence dated xxxx to get more information and to avoid missing deadline dates but as mentioned before it chose to ignore and wait for eleven days to take an action on xxxx as admitted in its defence point 5.1 and 5.3.

1. That is not the first time the second Defendant trying to mislead the court and not saying the truth as in case no. xxxx (exhibit ps/4) the second Defendant admitted in its Statement of Defence ‘’he is not the manging company’’ and in our case in question he trying to give the impression he manging all the Academy Central Development including the roads while he is only manging the properties not the roads so he has no right to contract the first Defendant to run private car park scheme, Site Management Plane attached (exhibit ps/7).

1. It looks like the second Defendant has no defence for his negligence except hunting the Court Notice of issue template letter / typo errors while the right action from him to contact the Court and get an evidence that the Court did not issue the Claim to him. The Notice of issue contents looks like a court template letter and depends on the top Defendant section contents which has the Defendant’s names where the Claim issued to.

1. The second Defendant had the chance to file his defence on time but again chose to do nothing. In Claim no. xxxx (Exhibit ps/6) the Court accepted late acknowledgment of service as the defence been filed on time.

1. The second Defendant said ‘’the Court Business Centre was not able to provide the Claim Form or Particulars of Claim’’ while that can not be possible as several times the Court been able to provide that free by email or for £20 fees for hard copy as done with the Claimant for the main Claim no. xxxx (exhibit ps/5).

1. The second Defendant negligence is surely a matter between him and its solicitor / Legal department (which will have professional indemnity insurance in respect of negligent actions on its part which lead it to miss deadline dates and this is not a "good reason".

1. If the second Defendant solicitors made an error, then the correct course of action from the second Defendant is to seek recompense from its solicitors due to their negligence rather than to prejudice an innocent Claimant.

1. The Claimant, as Individual, complied with all CPR, PD and court deadline dates and filed all documents on time so there is no reason why the professional Defendant or its professional Solicitor did not which would appear to have been negligence on its part.

1. It is an unfeasible coincidence that the professional Defendant & its professional solicitor failed to both send and receive everything in full, on time or by the right way. That is misuse and abuse of the court system and its rules and shows disrespect of the court, which should not allow such conduct and should apply the strict principles set out in Denton case?.

1. I have reason to believe that this relief from sanction application will proceed without any facts or evidence supplied until the last possible minute, to my significant detriment as an unrepresented Claimant.

At the end The Claimant asks the court to Request for Judgement N225 Form against second Defendant as its failure to file its acknowledgment of service and Defence by the deadline dates is attributable solely to its negligence not as a result of anything else, least of all in connection with anything Claimant did or failed to do.


I

[R0b]

I'll take a look over the weekend but I did tell you in my early posts that I don't think you had any claim against the management company so it is no surprise they are seeking to strike out your claim - you might have bitten off more than you can chew but you are where you are.

First initial glance is that you are making a number of opinions and attacks on the Defendant and/or their solicitor - I suggest you remove these as it won't look good. Try to keep it factual and less opinionated.

Also your first sentence asking for leeway because you are litigant in person, that's not going to fly at all. Everyone including litigant's in person have to follow the same set of rules.

Another point might be worth adding is that you can briefly mention that the MCOL system only provides for 1048 characters therefore you were limited in what you could say. If you want to continue holding them responsible for breach of the DPA and vicarious liability then I would suggest you draft more detailed particulars of claim setting out the cause of action and attach to your witness statement. A judge may very well be lenient with you that way and allow the amended particulars.

Finally, I am fairly certain that any application to set aside a default judgment must be supported with evidence and I am not so sure that a defence is considered to be evidence in support of the application - their defence is just that, the pleadings that they will rely on if the set aside application and relief from sanctions is granted, but it still requires evidence in support i.e. a witness statement or in Part C - assuming theyare suggesting that set aside is done under CPR 13.3. Their "evidence" in Part C is not really evidence, stating the claimant believes it did not receive it is in my eyes a pretty poor statement of evidence.

You may want to try and weave some of the above in and if the judge considers that notice of the claim should not have prevented them from acknowledging the claim and then seeking an extension of time to file a defence (up to 28 days).

[Sassii]

First initial glance is that you are making a number of opinions and attacks on the Defendant and/or their solicitor - I suggest you remove these as it won't look good. Try to keep it factual and less opinionated.

I amended my witness Statement as per your comments and will add introduction section as:

1. The Claimant launched this proceeding after the first Defendant for the last two years continuously breached Claimant’s personal details and chased the Claimant for several baseless claims which been struck out, dismissed, set aside or discontinued but the first Defendant persists to chase the Claimant with new baseless claims to cost, get default Judgement and cause damages to the Claimant (Exhibit ps/5). The Claimant complained several times to the second Defendant (Exhibit ps/3) about its contractor, first Defendant, but do nothing and replied that the first Defendant actions are in its legitimate interest (Exhibit ps/4), so the second Defendant is vicariously liable.

2. For the sake of Clarity, this Claim Form, including Particulars of Claim, was issued via the County Court Business Centre (Money Claim Online), a procedure is specifically provided for in the Civil Procedure Rules which only allows the Claimant to insert 1048 characters for Particulars of Claim details. In any event, I can confirm that the particulars of the claim contained sufficient information for the second Defendant to be aware of what the claim relates to. Further prior to Claim being issued the Defendant was sent letters / emails and a Letter Before Claim (Exhibit PS/3) in accordance with Pre Action Protocol but the second Defendant did not reply to Letter Before Claim although confirmed receiving (Exhibit PS/4). As such, the Second Defendant would have been aware of the Data breach which is subject of this claim.

3. More details about the main Claim are in Claimant’s Witness Statement for the main Claim preliminary Hearing on the same day.

[R0b]

When is the date of the hearing?

[Sassii]

When is the date of the hearing?

Direction / Preliminary hearing next Friday

[Sassii]

Hi

The parking Company (1st Defendant) Defence link below:

http://www.keepandshare.com/doc16/vi...?id=23768&da=y