URGENT: Data Protection Act 1998 Breach...

[2222]

**UPDATE**


I am no expert, but that last sentence sounds like an attempt at intimidation, to try and prevent me from filing a county court claim against them.

It's no more intimidating than your letter before action. There's absolutely nothing wrong with them saying they'll defend the case vigorously. They are warning you that they intend to spend the time and money to defend the case, and of course it's intended to put you off continuing.

Just be aware that you are about to embark on a rather long process that is going to be burdensome and EXTREMELY STRESSFUL. You could also be at risk of costs being awarded against you. You obviously don't have to proceed.

[2222]

Hello again...

I have now returned from my visit to the United States.

I have once again checked the address on the Charity Comissions website for Breckland Astronomical Society, and for the third time in around 3 months, it has changed. Does anyone know what they might be playing at? I know where the chairman lives, but now it appears that the address is for the tresurer.

I honestly dont know what is going on. What are they doing? Trying to avoid responsibility for what they have done perhaps?

Does anyone know what I should do now as the recorded letter I sent to the chairmans address was delivered then refused. Not sure what action to take now apart from visit the society on Tuesday and hand deliver my letter with a police officer present to prevent them inventing stuff against me to use in court should this matter go that far...

I think that you were already advised not to send your letter by recorded delivery, precisely because it's easily rejected. Just send it by ordinary first class mail and get a proof of postage. I have no idea why they have changed their address, but it's reasonable to send your letter to the chairman as well as to the 'registered' address.

I cannot advise you strongly enough NOT to visit the society on Tuesday. The police will not attend just to act as your unpaid witness.

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

Seems to me that they think that I don't have the emails that actually constituted a breach of data protection. They were released to me by BAS (after allegedly seeking guidance from ICO, when I believe they were trying to withhold them claiming that my request was malicious and vexatious), and by the ICO themselves.

how does my N1 draft look so far?

[2222]

Seems to me that they think that I don't have the emails that actually constituted a breach of data protection. They were released to me by BAS (after allegedly seeking guidance from ICO, when I believe they were trying to withhold them claiming that my request was malicious and vexatious), and by the ICO themselves.

how does my N1 draft look so far?

Your draft includes a request for emails you already have?

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

2222 yes, that is correct - an uncensored version. Currently I have copies that are heavily censored, even though I know what should be in there, for example names, and organisation names. This is why I am of the view that a ccourt can make an order that they disclose the emails without them being censored under section 35 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (this is what I will be filing this case under since it all happened before GDPR came in to force).

**EDIT**

It looks like BAS have finally posted thier physical address to the Charity Comissions website. Now I can serve an LBA to there.

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

Apologies for not replying sooner. I have not been well and I have been having computer issues with my PC tending to overheat causing shutdowns.

I have now repaired this issue and am now in a position to complete this matter.

As I expected, BAS did not respond to my LBA which I sent to them on 29th May 2019. I have given them well beyond the time I stated to reply, and this must now progress to a couny court matter.

I will be dealing with BAS in the first instance as NAS will be more complicated and will require much more time to complete.

I have so far drafted an N1 claim form which I would appreciate a review and maybe point me to any potential errors so I can correct them before I submit the matter to the court.

This is what I have so far:

In the Norwich County Court

Claimants details:
*CENSORED*

Defendants details
*CENSORED*

Brief details of claim:

1. The Claimant alleges that the defendants breached the Data Protection Act 1998, pursuant to
schedules 1 and 2.
2. The claimant has a letter (sent via email) from a Xxx. Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxxx from the Information Comissioners Office that states that the defendants did in fact breach the Data Protection Act 1998 under schedules 1 and 2., and the ICO sent a letter giving advice to the defendant to improve thier practices;
3. The claimant further alleges that the defendant maliciously disclosed details to a known third party organisation without his written consent and without any foundation in fact.
4. That the defendant failed to respond to a Letter Before Action dated 29th May 2019 sent on said date via First Class Post setting out his case and the resolution he is seeking.
5. That the defendants discriminated against the claimant on 3rd October 2014 by stating in an email that the Claimants application to join said society should be rejected "due to his unfortunate condition".
6. That the defendants disclosed inaccurate data to the Norwich Evening News when the claimant contacted them for a "story".
7. The Claimant seeks a declaration from the court that his Data Protection rights were breached.

Value:

I expect to recover not more than £1,500.

You must indicate your preferred County Court Hearing Centre for hearings here

Norwich County Court

Is this what is expected by a court on this form?

Amethyst, pt2537, 2222

[charitynjw]

Me being a pedant.......

.....to improve their practices;

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

charitynjw, Thankyou for your reply.

My concern is that they have had advice to improve thier data protection practices, and now that the ICO is not taking any further action against them, they are effectively walking away laughing, saying "we got away with that one!"

What they disclosed between them was twisted and distorted so much that it is very close to constituting defamation of character under the Defamation Act 2013.

For example: I ride a 2007 Honda CBR 125 motorcycle, and it is my only form of transport. I cannot switch off it's headlights and the BAS chairman told the Norwich Evening News that I deliberately shone my headlights at them! I don't see how he worked that out, considering my motorcycle currently cannot have its lights switched off. The way he told the news paper suggested to them that I deliberately turned them on and pointed the front of my bike at them with my lights on. That's is a complete invention, and has no foundation in fact whatsoever. I cannot "deliberately" shine my lights at them as they claim, its absurd and uses the fact that I cannot turn off my headlights.

After thinking about it, I am of the view that the real reason I was banned is because of the fact that I ride a motorcycle that I cant turn off the lights on and the fact that I have Asperger's which was confirmed by an email sent to me from the chairman at the time (not the current one) stating "due to your unfortunate condition, membership of the society would not be sutible for you, and after careful consideration, in the best interests of yourself and the society, it should be rejected." This is a direct reference to my "handicap" and constitutes discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 articles 6 and 20. It is a shame that I am out of time to take action for it as it was in 2014, although I still could given that it is still being used against me even today.

Is there anyone here that will be prepared to assist me on a "Pro Bono" basis?

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

So here is the N1 form that I have completed...

I have made a few small modifications, but am still not sure it it would be compliant with Civil Procedure Rules and dant to avoide the risk of my claim being "struck out" before it is heard.

I have of course redacted any personal information for Data Protection reasons.

Would someone please answer me? I want to get this done very soon!

Amethyst, pt2537, 2222.

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

I have now waited a full week, and no reply! Getting very frustrated anow at this point!

[pt2537]

I have now waited a full week, and no reply! Getting very frustrated anow at this point!

Im not sure what you want us to say, but there are no particulars of claim either in the claim or marked as to follow, very difficult to comment on pleadings when there arent any pleadings there!!!!

Also, getting frustrated isnt going to help you, if you want to seek assistance then perhaps sending a PM to the members who you want to comment would be better than sitting on your hands waiting? afterall people dont spend every day of their life looking at a PC screen waiting for someone to ask for help, we all have lives outside of here, we work, we have families, so bear that in mind before venting anger on the forum

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

pt2537, this is why I tag people, like I just have with you here.

I am preparing a "Particulars of Claim" to attach to this thread later, of course it will have personal data censored to prevent me from being done by them for the same thing I am taking action against them for.

What I was asking was if my N1 was OK, or if there is anything that is potentially missing, I mean, I do have more to add to the N1, but the space for entering data is limited and I cannot add anymore data.

I want to get this right before filing in the courts, to prevent the defendants from inventing an excuse to have it struck out without even getting of the ground. I am well aware that they will try this, since they have lied about everything else so far after all anyway.

I need help, I am not an expert in law, unlike some people here, including yourself. I just don't want to end up leaving court with them laughing at me.

I do however get the feeling that once I file my claim against BAS, they will not respond to it, which would result in me getting a default judgement against them. This should then mean that I can attend thier premisis with the permission of the court to recover whatever the court awards in my favor, and if not, enforcement action can be sought, I believe it is called a "Warrant of Distress" or something similar. I would welcome any corrections on this. What I have stated is what I have heard, nothing more.

How did my N1 look?

Question, are charities exempt from action under the Data Protection Act 1998, or the GDPR?? I am curious, so I can be prepared if they try and invent that as a defence...

[R0b]

There's no point giving us half of what you've done, either give the whole particulars or wait until you've finished it and then upload.

Your letter before action shold essentially be your template for the Particulars of Claim so it shouldn't really take much effort to fill in the blanks.

As for the N1, the brief particulars should be just that, brief. No more than a headline should suffice if you intend on writing more detailed particulars. For example:

1. This is a claim against the First and Second Defendants in respect of a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 (the Act), namely [cite the breach].

2. The said breach has caused the Defendant to suffer distress, loss and damage and seeks damages pursuant to Section 13 of the Act.

Although only two lines, the above should be sufficient for any reader looking at this claim form, to know what this claim is going to be about about. You then use the Particulars of Claim box to go into the specific details of the claim or attach separate particulars to the claim form.

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

R0b, Thank you for your reply. Your suggestion above has been most helpful.

I will however post here in quote boxes what I have here so that it may be looked at for any pointers on what can be improved... I pklan to serve this document on them later this week or early next week, if all goes to plan.

Do you think that it might be a good idea to include copies of documents that I intend to rely on in support of my legal case against them? Please do clarify this small matter, I may have to start scanning and printing... if so, time to break out Mr. Scanner!

Note, this is for BAS:

Brief details of claim:

1. This is a claim against the Defendants in respect of a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 (the Act), namely, that the defendants shared inaccurate personal data via email, about the Claimant with another similar oganisation (Norwich Astronomical Society) without the Claimants oral or written permission.

2. The said breach has caused the Claimant to suffer distress, loss and damage and seeks damages pursuant to Section 13 of the Act.

Particulars of Claim:

1. The Claimant alleges that the defendants breached the Data Protection Act 1998, pursuant to
schedules 1 and 2 between 5th March 2018 and 1st May 2018.
2. The claimant further alleges that the Defendant maliciously disclosed inaccurate information to a known third party organisation, namely, Norwich Astronomical Society, without his verbal or written consent.
3. That the Defendant failed to respond to a Letter Before Action dated 29th May 2019 and another previously dated 5th April 2019. Said letters are deemed delivered to the registered address on the Charity Comissions website under section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978.
4. That the Defendants invented alleged incidents and maliciously shared them with said third party organisation.
5. The Claimant further alleges that the Defendant described him as a "hazard" without any evidence.
6. The Claimant seeks a declaration from the court that his rights that are afforded him under the Data Protection Act 1998 were breached.
7. The Claimant seeks an order from the court, upon conclusion of this case, for the defendants to delete all data that relates to him pursuant to Article 17 of the GDPR 2018.
8. The Claimant seeks relief from the Defendant pursuant to section 13 of the Data Protection Act 1998.
9. The Claimant also seeks a formal written apology from the Defendant in relation to the data breach.

Please do let me know how this looks so far...

2222, pt2537, Amethyst

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

Anyone?