141 withholding caller ID

[Adamna]

I recently made a call to the HMRC VAT helpline, being careful to precede the number with 141 so that the number I was calling from would be withheld. I was surprised to have the number relayed back to me during a request to call me back on it. I contacted Ofcom and they confirmed that 141 should withhold a number to all but the emergency services. I don’t think that HMRC can be regarded as an emergency service. Regulations state that all telephone providers include the operational use of 141 to protect privacy.
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/tel...ler-line-id/#5
I have made a complaint to the provider (a call which lasted 3 hours and it was difficult to even get them to understand the issue) and so far not been able to get anything more than ‘sorry about that’ out of them.
Has anyone any knowledge about withholding numbers, and whether HMRC (for example) can legitimately use some technology to override Calling Line Identification prevention?

[nemesis45]

Re: 141 withholding caller ID

I recently made a call to the HMRC VAT helpline, being careful to precede the number with 141 so that the number I was calling from would be withheld. I was surprised to have the number relayed back to me during a request to call me back on it. I contacted Ofcom and they confirmed that 141 should withhold a number to all but the emergency services. I don’t think that HMRC can be regarded as an emergency service. Regulations state that all telephone providers include the operational use of 141 to protect privacy.
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/tel...ler-line-id/#5
I have made a complaint to the provider (a call which lasted 3 hours and it was difficult to even get them to understand the issue) and so far not been able to get anything more than ‘sorry about that’ out of them.
Has anyone any knowledge about withholding numbers, and whether HMRC (for example) can legitimately use some technology to override Calling Line Identification prevention?

Good morning,
The same thing happens with the DWP as well, on some numbers it seems anonymous calls are rejected.

nem

[Kati]

Re: 141 withholding caller ID

Was the phone you called from a landline or mobile??

[Adamna]

Re: 141 withholding caller ID

Was the phone you called from a landline or mobile??

Sorry, I meant to say, it was a landline. Though 141 should work for a mobile as well.

[Adamna]

Re: 141 withholding caller ID

"The same thing happens with the DWP as well, on some numbers it seems anonymous calls are rejected."
Do you mean caller numbers are not withheld (when they should be) at DWP?
You can set your own phone to reject anonymous calls (I believe) but gov lines should not be (and are not?) set like that.

[Kati]

Re: 141 withholding caller ID

It does seem strange ... I know TalkTalk had a problem with 141 not working a while ago, but you'd think it was sorted now :noidea:

Who is the landline provider? A formal complaint to the CEO of the company might be the way forward xx

[wales01man]

Re: 141 withholding caller ID

I cannot see the problem if you are talking to HMRC or DWP its about you sowhy be secretive

[Adamna]

Re: 141 withholding caller ID

Yes, TalkTalk were the provider.

- - - Updated - - -

I cannot see the problem if you are talking to HMRC or DWP its about you sowhy be secretive

You cannot see a problem with regulated privacy being breached? :tinysmile_aha_t:

[wales01man]

Re: 141 withholding caller ID

Want to you want to do about it claim compo or get it stopped

[Adamna]

Re: 141 withholding caller ID

Want to you want to do about it claim compo or get it stopped

I want to know how it happened - was it TalkTalk's system being inadequate or are HMRC interfering with the privacy one should expect. Because you can't legally do that, it seems to me. Either is pretty serious.

[Kati]

Re: 141 withholding caller ID

There's a few complaints on the TalkTalk community forum (such as: http://community.talktalk.co.uk/t5/H...p/td-p/1618074)

[Kati]

Re: 141 withholding caller ID

You could try an email to Ms Dido Harding CEO - http://www.ceoemail.com/s.php?id=b-9...ef%20Executive

TalkTalk Group
Ms Dido Harding Chief Executive

Email dido.harding@talktalkplc.com

Telephone 0203 417 1000

Switchboard 0203 417 1000

Website http://www.talktalkgroup.com

Postal Address 11 Evesham Street, London, W11 4AR

Company Number 04633015

Company Status Active (Established 10/01/2003)

[Amethyst]

Re: 141 withholding caller ID

Might be worth a chat with Ofcom first

If you want advice or to complain to Ofcom please call us on 0300 123 3333 or 020 7981 3040. We are open Monday to Friday from 9.00am to 5.00pm.

and potentially the ICO ( as you ask the telephone company to not pass your personal data ( number) on to the recipient of the call and they do anyway ) ? possibly ?? ( just thinking aloud really)

[Amethyst]

Re: 141 withholding caller ID

THE DATA PROTECTION REGISTRAR

Using the law to protect your information


Calling Line Identification (CLI)

Caller Display - Use of Captured Data

1. By Caller Display we mean the facility which provides for the display and possible capture of the caller's number by the called party.

2. In the implementation of Caller Display concerns about protecting the privacy of the caller have been recognised and the caller is able to suppress the display of his number on a call-by-call basis by dialling the prefix 141. Suppression is possible for all calls made from a particular number.

3. Caller Display allows not only the display but the capture of the caller's telephone number by the called party. If that number is subsequently held as personal data by the called party, the question arises: has it been obtained fairly?

4. It is a requirement of the First Data Protection Principle that information to be contained in personal data is obtained fairly. The Registrar's view is that this means that the source of the information should know who is to use the data and for what purpose or purposes the data are to be used or disclosed. If these matters are not obvious because of the nature of the transaction, they must be explained to the source before the information is given. This view has been supported by the Data Protection Tribunal in its decision regarding Innovations (Mail Order) Limited.

5. There are a number of reasons why the calling number might be retained by the called party. These range from use by a private subscriber simply to return the call, to commercial use such as enhancing an existing customer database or establishing a new database.

6. The Registrar would accept that use of the captured number in direct connection with the original call by the called party is a use which the caller would reasonably expect. Such use could include the example above of returning a call if the called party had been unable to take the original call immediately. (in any event, in this case it is arguable that the information retained is not personal data). Another such use, in a commercial context, would be to reference an existing customer database if the number were already held on it.

7. However, the Registrar considers that obtaining the number and holding it as personal data if it were not already held as such is something which may not be obvious to the caller. In those circumstances, it is likely that the fair obtaining requirement of the First Principle would have been contravened by the called party if no explanation had been given to the caller.

8. A further concern is that individuals may not often ring companies from home. Therefore, it is dangerous to assume that you can call a specific individual back on the number from which they have made a call. Where a company wishes to use the number displayed to get back to a caller a sensible, practical safeguard is to ask a caller if you can call them back on the number displayed.

"Do you mind if we call you back on 01 793 056708?" (or whatever the number displayed is).

9. It is easy to envisage circumstances in which the calling number could be retained for purposes which are unconnected with the original call. An example would be to enhance a marketing database which is intended to be rented to other companies for their marketing purposes. The Registrar considers that to retain the number for such purposes without the express consent of the caller, would be likely to contravene the First Data Protection Principle.

10. In summary, the essence of the matter is that the callers number may only be captured and held as personal data by the called party for purposes directly connected with the original call, unless the caller gives express consent to its subsequent use for other purposes.


Data Protection Registrar

14 August 1997

( bit old I know)

[Adamna]

Re: 141 withholding caller ID

I've waded through what I can find on the TalkTalk site, all the problems seem to be with people being unable to use 141, not having used it and it didn't actually do what it says on the tin.... It's alarming because usually, you wouldn't know it hadn't worked unless the person on the other end tells you.