URGENT: Data Protection Act 1998 Breach...

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

I guess with all the silence, I am all alone! God, this is so incredibly frustrating!

[2222]

I did warn you that you were embarking on a difficult course. I don't have the experience to help you, but my feeling is that you may have to accept that you're not going to achieve the perfection you want.

I'm not certain that it makes much difference if you miss a minor point or express yourself poorly, anyway.

[2222]

My response to the draft particulars is that they are short on substance. Why not stick to the facts. I have no idea how you can prove malicious intent. Try to shorten it. What is the point of each sentence in terms of damages. If none takes it out.

The court will not order the defendant to apologise.

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

Everything else OK?

What do you mean by "substance" 2222??

[MIKE770]

Factual information!

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

Everything I have said is "factual information"...

[2222]

Okay, let's go through your "brief details", which are hardly brief, line by line.

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.

You mean:

1. The Defendant breached the Data Protection Act 1998 between 5th March 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 written consent.

Omit here and include in POC. Have they admitted malicious intent? Or is this your interpretation of their actions? You should have really strong evidence before bandying around such accusations.


3. That the Defendant failed to respond to a Letter Before Action dated 29th May 2019 and another previously dated 5th April 2019.

Why is this worth mentioning here? Maybe if it comes to costs. Omit



4. That the Defendant disclosed inaccurate data to the Norwich Evening News when the claimant contacted them for a "story".

Omit here and include in POC, but you will need to state what was said that was inaccurate and how that is covered by the DPA.



5. The Claimant further alleges that the Defendant described him as a "hazard" without any evidence.

What has this to do with the DPA? Omit



6. The Claimant seeks a declaration from the court that his Data Protection rights were breached.

Why do you need this? I thought you were asking for damages.



7. The Claimant seeks an order from the court, upon conclusion of the case, for the defendants to delete all data that relates to him in accordance with GDPR 2018 and the Data Protection Act 2018.

If the court has power to make such an order, you just need to say here:

I seek an order from the court for the Defendant to delete all data that relate to me

I have no idea why you care.



8. The Claimant seeks relief from the Defendant under section 18 of the Data Protection Act 1998.

What's all this about? Is section 18 still in effect?





9. The Claimant also seeks a formal written apology from the Defendant in relation to the data breach.

Surely, the court has no power to make such an order?


So, my suggestion for brief particulars of claim comes down to:

The Defendant breached my rights under the Data Protection Act 1998 between 5th March and 1st May 2018, and I claim damages.

Hope this helps.

[2222]

What was said to the newspaper may, possibly, be defamation. However, enormously wisely, you are steering clear of a defamation case. Instead, you are trying to shoe-horn it into this data protection case. I am no expert on DP, but I'm really surprised that it's covered. Are you quite sure?

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

What they and NAS disclosed to the NEN, was not only inaccurate, but also as 2222 stated, potentially defamation. Some of the rubbish they AND NAS invented is astonishing to say the least. That does not matter now as any defamation claim would be statute barred now anyway.

[R0b]

Your Particulars of Claim fails to provide any reasonable cause of action.

POC are meant to be a concise statement of facts to enable the defendant to know what he or she is up against. From what I've read, all you've put in the POC are allegations and zero facts.

Keep it simple and don't over-complicate matters. For example:

1. The Claimant was a former member the First Defendant's society.
2. On or about X date the Claimant and the First Defendant had a dispute resulting in the Claimant leaving the society.
3. The Claimant made an application to join the Second Defendant's society but was refused. The Claimant became aware that First Defendant disclosed certain information containing personal data, which was done without any lawful justification and contrary to the Data Protection Act 1998 and/or The Data Protection Act 2018. Due to the disclosure, the Claimant was denied membersip to the Second Defendant's society.
4. In the circumstances, the unlawful actions of the First Defendant has caused the Claimant to suffer distress, anxiety, inconvenience and frustration.
5. There Claimant therefore claims <<insert amount>> as compensation pursuant to <<insert legal references>>.

I don't know if the above exmaple is representative of your claim because quite frankly I've lost track given that this has spanned a number of pages. However, I am sure you get my point.

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

This is why the law is so frustrating! It feels to me as though it was written in such a way to purposely make it difficult for people like me to file claims against people like these two societies.

[R0b]

It's only frustrating for those who don't or can't be bothered to read the rules. Sure, some of the specifics can be confusing and obscure but for issuing claims it's not that difficult.

I suggest you read the link below which still has relevant and will give you everything you need to know in layman's terms.

https://www.judiciary.uk/publication...-civil-221013/

Still amazed that this thread for me has spanned 5 pages for something so simple but there you go.

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

11 pages. And it is because I want to get this claim right so it is not struck out by the court for not complying with CPR 33.4.

[R0b]

Like I said before it need not be perfect.

I've given you an example to start with but it shouldnt take you too long to knock out. Again as I've mentioned previously, the letter before action is your guide.

[«THÖMÅS®©™»]

R0b, using your previous advice above in your last post, I effectively copied the LBA to the claim form, but I am getting the suggestion it's not right. What am I missing?