Media reports suggest a USB stick from Heathrow Airport containing security information, including details of measures used to protect the Queen has been found on a street
Letter before small claims court claim
Mrs E Windsor
The Chap in Charge of Security
The Compass Centre,
Reference: cock-up with one’s personal data
As it has not been possible to resolve this matter amicably, and it is apparent that court action may be necessary, We write in compliance with the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct (we considered treason charges, but One wishes to be tolerant).
We are informed that Heathrow Airport says it has launched an internal investigation after a USB stick containing security information was reportedly found on the street. The beastly communist Sunday Mirror reported that the USB stick had 76 folders with maps, videos and documents, including details of measures used to protect Us. A subject found it in west London and handed it into the paper.
From you We are claiming fifty guineas for distress.
We have calculated this sum on the basis that section 13(1) of our Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) provides that one can grab a bit of extra money for the races by showing that one has suffered damage cos of a cock-up with one’s personal data. When We agreed the old DPA by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in the then Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, We thought one couldn’t grab said moolah merely if one was a bit peeved, but thought one had to have suffered tangible harm first. However, some of Our ghastly judges [who the bleeding hell do they work for?] decided a while ago, on the basis of a law passed by one’s distant relations that they would simply disapply Our section 13(2) [arses]. Given that, We might as well chuck Our Crown into the ring.
Listed below are the documents on which We intend to rely in Our claim against you:
Beastly seditious rag
Jolly old skit from the chaps at 11 Kings [WHAT?] Bench Walk
Treason Act 1351 (no harm in a quick reminder eh?)
We can confirm that We would be agreeable to mediation and would consider any other system of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in order to avoid the need for this matter to be resolved by Our (n.b. “Our”) courts.
We would invite you to put forward any proposals in this regard.
In closing, We would draw your attention to paragraphs 15 and 16 of the Practice Direction which [should give Our courts the power to imprison grotty oiks] gives courts powers to impose sanctions on the parties if they fail to comply with the direction including failing to respond to this letter before claim.
We look forward to hearing from you within the next 28 days.
Should We not receive a response to my letter within this time frame then We anticipate that court action will be commenced with no further reference to you [where’s Albert Pierrepoint when you need him?]
*Not “data subject”, naturally. We are the data subject.
The views in this post (and indeed all posts on this blog) are my personal ones, and do not represent the views of any organisation I am involved with.