Data Protection doesn't exist

[Pinky69]

Both my cases to the ICO have been brushed aside. In the first, there were no original statements and glaring errors in the concocted statements, which the bank admitted were done in the "back room" and I wasn't meant to see them. The ICO conclusion, in spite of clear evidence to the contrary, is that they were "probably" correct, taking the banks side without any evidence whatsoever.

In the second case, the bank produced 3 different sets of statements as there are no originals - and all had errors. Yet the ICO have ruled that as I had complained to the bank, as long as the bank attached my complaints to my file they could go on reporting the data to the credit reference agencies and if I wanted to dispute it I could go to court!! If that is not collusion, I don't know what is. That reply is incredible.

So there is the evidence that the ICO do not protect personal data and banks can record anything on credit reports, accurate or not.

[debtisbad]

Re: Data Protection doesn't exist

Agreed! Almost identical to my own case. Also reported on here. maybe a few backhanders or jobs for the boys.

[Loring]

Re: Data Protection doesn't exist

Hi Pinky
I had a complaint with the ICO about Carphone Warehouse, who defaulted me for a debt of £19 which I did not owe them at all. I was never told about any default and found it when I sent away for my credit file. The default was on my file for 4 years before I found it, it then took another 12 months to have it removed after Carphone Warehouse admitted it was an error, 3 times they wrote to say it would removed. Then they decided it was a fraudulent account. They claimed they had sent monthly statements for a pay as you go sim card for 4years. I sent them a SAR and they returned my cheque in an envelope and provided nothing.
When I made a complaint to the ICO the response was they thought Carphone Warehouse had done nothing wrong and Carphone Warehouse took their Data Protection work seriously.
Looks like the ICO is a waste of office space.
I have now lodged a complaint with the ICO.
loring

[basa48]

Re: Data Protection doesn't exist

I would never recommend anyone bother to complain to the ICO.

I battled with them for a year about a creditor who defaulted me with no paperwork whatsoever. They just kept replying that if I had transacted at all they could process data.

So basically if I walk into Tesco or Asda and buy my groceries they can report my transactions to a CRA?

[Pinky69]

Re: Data Protection doesn't exist

Thank you all for your replies and your experiences mirror mine. It is really appalling and it seems nothing can be done about it. Let's hope thete will be more breaches like Google's that will eventually bring the ICO down.

[debtisbad]

Re: Data Protection doesn't exist

I have long held the view after reading accounts such as our own on here that many of the so-called regulatory bodies are nothing of the sort and I truly question their existence at a time when government is cutting back on expenditure. They exist,as far as one can see, for only simple reasons, such as they are being paid off by the banking industry, or it's a nice gravy train to be on. They do nothing to regulate anything, however.

[leclerc]

Re: Data Protection doesn't exist

How did you complain?
What did you complain about?

To be honest, I don't think the ICO is necessarily as bad as you say and that furthermore, they would have to reform the Data Protection Act to get rid of the ICO since they are there for a reason. Perhaps working with them rather than complain cos they said they didn't agree with you might be better.
Just a personal opinion.

[leclerc]

Re: Data Protection doesn't exist

Both my cases to the ICO have been brushed aside. In the first, there were no original statements and glaring errors in the concocted statements, which the bank admitted were done in the "back room" and I wasn't meant to see them. The ICO conclusion, in spite of clear evidence to the contrary, is that they were "probably" correct, taking the banks side without any evidence whatsoever.
What do you mean that they were probably correct?
What information did you request? What was provided?
In the second case, the bank produced 3 different sets of statements as there are no originals - and all had errors.
Statements by definition are copies rather than originals that would have been sent out. What do you mean?
Yet the ICO have ruled that as I had complained to the bank, as long as the bank attached my complaints to my file they could go on reporting the data to the credit reference agencies and if I wanted to dispute it I could go to court!!
Then why have you not gone to court to resolve this issue?
If that is not collusion, I don't know what is. That reply is incredible.
The ICO will enforce the Data Protection Act but you need to be clear and precise how they have breached the Data Protection Act. If for example, it is a default or a debt that you do not acknowledge then that is not good enough to be honest. If there is no debt or that the case is fraud then they have to act.
So there is the evidence that the ICO do not protect personal data and banks can record anything on credit reports, accurate or not.

You have to prove that their information is incorrect so maybe they did not have enough information to go against the financial provider's evidence that they gave to the ICO.

[Pinky69]

Re: Data Protection doesn't exist

I went to the ICO as an alternative to going to court and totally wasted my time. My complaints were about inaccuracies in default entries on credit reports. The statements I was sent by the banks concerned were concocted - there are no originals - and the concocted statements were incomplete and had errors eg a carry over balance mistake of £563 - and that was only one error. One of the banks adnitted that the staements were done in the "back room" and I wasn't supposed to have seen them! The errors were ignored by the ICO who said the banks were "probably right" - when the ICO had the concocted statements in front of them which showed the banks weren't right at all. If that is not bias I do not know what is. That is a cut and dried case and the ICO have failed in their duty to protect my personal data. I doubt if the people dealing with it and the posters on here who write in favour of the ICO would allow erroneous entries on their default records and accept the banks continuing to process their data erroneously just because the banks had their complaints on file!! I have never heard of anything so absurd. The ICO are not fit for purpose and should be closed down. I made complaints to the ICO for them to deal with. There was no call for me to "work with" them. I made the complaints and sent all the evidence to support my complaints and they totally ignored the evidence, drawn up by the banks themselves. I have sent a copy of my complaints and their replies to every single member of their board of management, although from what I have read all they are interested in is their expenses. I am afraid they ARE as bad as I have said they are and if you want further proof of that just google all the blogs and articles about the ICO and Google itself. Hopeless idiots.

[debtisbad]

Re: Data Protection doesn't exist

How did you complain?
What did you complain about?

To be honest, I don't think the ICO is necessarily as bad as you say and that furthermore, they would have to reform the Data Protection Act to get rid of the ICO since they are there for a reason. Perhaps working with them rather than complain cos they said they didn't agree with you might be better.
Just a personal opinion.

Thank you for your opinion. This is an open forum. The accounts that you read on this thread are ordinary people who have genuinely been treated badly by the ICO and who consider it to be a nasty piece of work. I'm not quite sure what your phrase, "working with them" means in that everyone on here seems to have supplied adequate paperwork to support their positions. In my own case, for example, I have two CRA entries that are totally untrue. It took the ICO over 1 year to respond to the two complaints and that was only after I went through their complaints system. However, they did nothing to resolve the situation. As I live abroad, I cannot be bothered going to court in the UK, nor do I see why I should. A regulatory body is there to uphold the truth and if they cannot do that, something is definitely wrong. Noses in troughs seems to come to mind. The ICO are a total disgrace at a time when we are making cutbacks and sacrifices in every area.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Well said pinky69.

[leclerc]

Re: Data Protection doesn't exist

Thank you for your opinion. This is an open forum. The accounts that you read on this thread are ordinary people who have genuinely been treated badly by the ICO and who consider it to be a nasty piece of work. I'm not quite sure what your phrase, "working with them" means in that everyone on here seems to have supplied adequate paperwork to support their positions. In my own case, for example, I have two CRA entries that are totally untrue. It took the ICO over 1 year to respond to the two complaints and that was only after I went through their complaints system. However, they did nothing to resolve the situation. As I live abroad, I cannot be bothered going to court in the UK, nor do I see why I should. A regulatory body is there to uphold the truth and if they cannot do that, something is definitely wrong. Noses in troughs seems to come to mind. The ICO are a total disgrace at a time when we are making cutbacks and sacrifices in every area.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Well said pinky69.

Criticizing a body rather than understanding how they work which is something I am currently looking into. For example, a default entry being wrong has two elements to it, the lender in question, the CRA and the responses. If the Lender has said it is false and will be removed by x date in writing and the CRA have stated it will be removed or will act and doesn't then that is a complaint the ICO should be doing something about.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

I went to the ICO as an alternative to going to court and totally wasted my time. My complaints were about inaccuracies in default entries on credit reports. The statements I was sent by the banks concerned were concocted - there are no originals - and the concocted statements were incomplete and had errors eg a carry over balance mistake of £563 - and that was only one error. One of the banks adnitted that the staements were done in the "back room" and I wasn't supposed to have seen them! The errors were ignored by the ICO who said the banks were "probably right" - when the ICO had the concocted statements in front of them which showed the banks weren't right at all.
Did they use the words, "probably right" and in what respects was the statement made(can you quote the statement so that I have the context of the phrase)?

If that is not bias I do not know what is. That is a cut and dried case and the ICO have failed in their duty to protect my personal data. I doubt if the people dealing with it and the posters on here who write in favour of the ICO would allow erroneous entries on their default records and accept the banks continuing to process their data erroneously just because the banks had their complaints on file!! I have never heard of anything so absurd. The ICO are not fit for purpose and should be closed down.
What you are stating is that you want a change in the Data Protection Act 1998 so what is your solution to a regulator that has to make a decision and that may not always go in your favour?
I made complaints to the ICO for them to deal with. There was no call for me to "work with" them. I made the complaints and sent all the evidence to support my complaints and they totally ignored the evidence, drawn up by the banks themselves. I have sent a copy of my complaints and their replies to every single member of their board of management, although from what I have read all they are interested in is their expenses. I am afraid they ARE as bad as I have said they are and if you want further proof of that just google all the blogs and articles about the ICO and Google itself. Hopeless idiots.

I don't agree with on the ICO and I do believe that there are ways in which you can get them to take action(albeit what action do you believe that they should take?)

I'm gonna leave this one to you guys cos you want the ICO to go yet what organisation or what replacement you want is not on this thread apart from one that agrees with you all the time.

[Angry Cat]

Re: Data Protection doesn't exist

My experiences wiith the ICO have been mixed.

I had some success in obtaining assistance in removing incorrect data from my CRA credit file.

But, was very dissapointed about how the ICO handled another complaint.
I was unable to obtain all data from a Bank under an SAR, the Bank told the ICO that they had provided all but they had not; the ICO believed the Bank!

[debtisbad]

Re: Data Protection doesn't exist

Criticizing a body rather than understanding how they work which is something I am currently looking into. For example, a default entry being wrong has two elements to it, the lender in question, the CRA and the responses. If the Lender has said it is false and will be removed by x date in writing and the CRA have stated it will be removed or will act and doesn't then that is a complaint the ICO should be doing something about.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------


I don't agree with on the ICO and I do believe that there are ways in which you can get them to take action(albeit what action do you believe that they should take?)

I'm gonna leave this one to you guys cos you want the ICO to go yet what organisation or what replacement you want is not on this thread apart from one that agrees with you all the time.

I am not so sure from reading what you have submitted that you have grasped the basic principles involved. It is specifically about incorrect information being recorded on CRAs and trying to get it removed.

In most, of not all cases cited on this thread, people have had adverse data recorded against them that is incorrect. In my own case, to the tune of more than 15000 pounds. Again, all people on the thread seem to have followed the correct protocol, contacting the other parties involved, including the OCs, DCAs and CRAs, but unfortunately without success. Again, following protocol, most of us approached the ICO who are the relevant regulatory body. The ICO, by their own admission are swamped with work, which only goes to show the amount of abuse being reported in the CRA system. In several cases, including my own, the only way to expedite matters after waiting more than a year was to go through the ICOs complaints procedures, albeit reluctantly. In all cases in this thread that went that far, they have all reported that the ICO did not even begin to address the nature of the abuse being reported. I hope that this clarifies the reason for the thread to you. I am sure that the ICO are involved in areas other than the one raised here, but those other areas are of no value to this discussion. There are other threads on here that may be more relevant to your submissions and I urge you to make your contribution in the appropriate place.

[Pinky69]

Re: Data Protection doesn't exist

There are no ways to get the ICO to take action on incorrect default entries. They had the evidence that the entries on my credit reports were wrong and did nothing to have the entries removed, which is their function and which is why they are not fit for purpose. In doing do they completely ignored the DPA and their own guidelines on filing defaults. Default entries must be lawful and accurate. The banks have put incorrect data on my credit reports and the ICO have failed to have these incorrect data removed. It isn't difficult to see what it should be replaced with. A regulatory organisation that can look at statements and be able to recognise that they are wrong. If 2+2 equals 4 on 1 page and you turn the page and the balance brought forward is 9 then even a primary school child can tell that isn't right, but obviously not the ICO. The banks don't know what the balances should be - they don't have any records and they told me so when I sent the SARs. Also, according to the ICO, if you complained to the bank, they can continue reporting the erroneous data as long as they have attached your complaint to their file! Oh well that is all right then. Your complaint obviously gives them some kind of permission to go on breaking the DPA. It must be a full moon - I have never heard such total tripe. As for the contents of the ICO's reply, it was as I said. "With regard to filing the disputed defaults, the bank is probably conforming to the principles of the DPA." That view is contrary to all the evidence before the ICO and the ICO should be dealing in hard facts, not biased opinions. How can they be conforming when the statements are full of errors? The ICO cannot get these cases of their desks quickly enough because there is a 10 month backlog and they are not reading the cases properly.

[debtisbad]

Re: Data Protection doesn't exist

Well said again, that should spell it out clearly to anyone who has had no personal experience of having their credit file abused and who thinks that it's up to you to sort it out as it's is nothing to do with the bank, DCA, CRA or ICO.