Law firm sends repeated emails to incorrect email address

Discovery

Client X (CX) and his ex-partner decided to sell their property and instructed a conveyancing firm to deal with the sale on their behalf. CX became concerned when he did not hear further from the conveyancing firm for some time so contacted them for an update.

It then became apparent that the conveyancing firm had been repeatedly sending correspondence to the wrong email address containing personal information pertaining to CX; this was why CX had not heard anything from them. Once they realised the error, the firm acknowledged their mistake and offered CX a few hundred pounds as compensation. CX decided not to accept the small amount of money offered to him and instead contacted our specialist Data Protection firm to take over this issue for him.

Representation

Without hesitation, Mr Matthew McConville, the Head of our firm’s Data Protection Department, offered CX no win no fee terms because the money currently offered to CX was not an acceptable amount for this repeated breach committed by the law firm in question. After this, Mr McConville presented a Letter of Claim to the said firm and explained why they were liable in law and why they should also pay a lot more to CX than what they have proposed so far.

Mr McConville alleged that the firm in question had breached the Data Protection Act 2018 / General Data Protection Regulations 2018, had infringed CX’s Human Rights, breached confidence and also misused private information. Upon receipt of this Letter of Claim, the law firm wanted to engage in ‘without prejudice’ discussions with a view to settling the matter.

Resolution

After a series of negotiations following this, an agreement was eventually reached between CX and the involved firm which was fifteen times more than what they had offered in settlement before Mr McConville became involved. Within this resolution, the firm refused to formally accept liability and also insisted upon a stringent settlement agreement which included a confidentiality clause so that CX could not disclose the settlement details that he has achieved. CX decided to agree to this so that he can focus on moving on with his life.