I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

Re: I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

I disagree strongly, Puff. Investigations do, unfortunately, take time. The reason for this is because as you investigate one thing, other things come to light and you have to investigate them as well, unless another LEA has responsibility for investigation. In a case such as this, ICO are going to need to find out just how careless the bailiff company has been, whether anyone whose personal information they have handled has suffered any consequential loss as a result of the bailiff company's carelessness, whether the information has fallen into the hands of "bin skimmers", those who steal people's personal information from sifting through rubbish and then selling it criminals in exchange for cash or drugs... I could go on.

I still agree strongly with Labman. The OP needs to hand the matter over to the ICO and let them deal with it. The Press will get the story from the ICO's Press Office sooner or later.

Nonsense , they are entrusted with personal information, it should not be dumped or binned it shroud be shredded or burned, it is a disgrace and needs to be shown up.

Also it is in the first instance a matter for the police, the same as any other criminal offense, even if it is only suspected, the police will decide if there is a case, and who will enforce this is what they do. i have had this confirmed by a real serving officer, who has expressed an interest in this, as i say, i don't expect anyone to believe me and he is perfectly willing to confirm it himself i will give anyone his contact details if you pm me.( he may want your real name though).

It is not up to a member of the public to decide who will enforce a criminal offence, it is not a civil matter it is an offence against the crown and the police enforce these, you would expect an ex police officer to know this.

You suspect a crime you go to the police, it really isn't rocket science.

As for going to the press, like i said i most certainly would, this is a matter of choice of course, but experience tells me that things tend to get done far quicker and with far greater vigor when they are under public scrutiny, this is pretty obvious if you ask me.


Peter

[bluebottle]

Re: I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

Terrible as it may sound, there are people in this world who do things like what I've highlighted in my post.

[Hurricane Puffrose]

Re: I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

you know more than i do hun

[bluebottle]

Re: I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

may I suggest, the OP contacts the ICO and gives themselves a timescale, say.. 14days, if they hear nothing back by that time, then they contact the press?

I disagree strongly, Puff. Investigations do, unfortunately, take time. The reason for this is because as you investigate one thing, other things come to light and you have to investigate them as well, unless another LEA has responsibility for investigation. In a case such as this, ICO are going to need to find out just how careless the bailiff company has been, whether anyone whose personal information they have handled has suffered any consequential loss as a result of the bailiff company's carelessness, whether the information has fallen into the hands of "bin skimmers", those who steal people's personal information from sifting through rubbish and then selling it criminals in exchange for cash or drugs... I could go on.

I still agree strongly with Labman. The OP needs to hand the matter over to the ICO and let them deal with it. The Press will get the story from the ICO's Press Office sooner or later.

[Hurricane Puffrose]

Re: I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

may I suggest, the OP contacts the ICO and gives themselves a timescale, say.. 14days, if they hear nothing back by that time, then they contact the press?

Re: I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

Peter,

I am not going to get into a debate about the ethics of tipping off the Press about a firm of scummy bailiffs being careless about how they dispose of sensitive personal data. In this matter, I am in total agreement with Labman as to the ICO being the correct Law Enforcement Agency (LEA) to contact, in the first instance. If any criminal offences are, then, uncovered, the ICO have an obligation to notify the police.

End of story.

BB

Missed this post

Not quite, firstly as you say there is no ethics issue here so it doesn't merit debate.

I think it is in the public interest to know how these fellas treat our personal data. If there was any legal reason why this should not be on the news stand the paper would not print it.

Secondly there is the practical matter of what the OP does with the stuff, i mean he still has other peoples data in his hands, is this a good idea?

Perhaps he should destroy it, no he cant do that of course, evidence.

Peter

Re: I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

I'm calling on my previous experience, here. If you are a Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) and you are informed that a criminal offence has been committed, the last thing you want or need is for the suspect(s) to be warned and anyone else connected with the offence to be warned. By catching them unawares, it gives them little, if any, chance of concocting a story to get themselves and others connected with it off the hook. From what the OP has said, it sounds like information of a financial and, also, of a legal or quasi-legal nature was disposed of in a totally irresponsible manner. Some of this information is likely to be of a very sensitive nature. Where court proceedings are concerned, a person accused of a criminal offence is entitled to a fair hearing, a right enshrined in law under the Human Rights Act. If details of the case are circulated in the public domain prior to the hearing, how can that person be guaranteed a fair hearing, eh?

This is not open to debate the documents are there for all to see, i don't think it is likely to catch anyone by surprise, since the first thing the ICO will do (if they do anything) is contact them.

So you think that no comment or opinion should be expressed in a public forum on anything that may result in a legal action?
Well it is an interesting view.

Peter

[bluebottle]

Re: I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

Yes, but I know what it means, there is no court case here(yet), nor is there likely to be.


Ever heard of freedom of the press.

Peter

Peter,

I am not going to get into a debate about the ethics of tipping off the Press about a firm of scummy bailiffs being careless about how they dispose of sensitive personal data. In this matter, I am in total agreement with Labman as to the ICO being the correct Law Enforcement Agency (LEA) to contact, in the first instance. If any criminal offences are, then, uncovered, the ICO have an obligation to notify the police.

End of story.

BB

Re: I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

When a person is charged and proceeded against for a criminal offence, the purpose of the court hearing is to determine whether the person is guilty or not guilty of the offence they are charged with having committed. An offence is deemed criminal by statute, not by a court. Since 6 April 2010, the ICO has used FPNs as a way of dealing with infringements of the DPA. However, if, during the course of an investigation, it becomes clear that any criminal offences have been committed, the ICO are obliged to inform the police who are tasked with the investigation of offences under the Criminal Law.

With regard to having information about other people and passing it others without the consent of those to whom the information relates, yes, it is a breach of the DPA, provided the information is not used for any criminal purpose, e.g. to commit Fraud, Blackmail or Burglary. However, if the information has been obtained as the result of a criminal act, e.g. Theft or Burglary, it then becomes stolen property. If personal information is used to commit criminal acts against the person or persons to whom the personal information relates, it then becomes a matter for the ICO AND the police.

A case involving A4e highlighted this. An A4e employee's home was burgled and a laptop holding unencrypted clients' details was stolen. Some clients suffered loss as a result. The ICO dealt with the DPA issues whilst the police dealt with the criminal issues.

Confusing? Frustrating? Yes, it can be very frustrating when someone has used your personal information without your permission, but, unfortunately, until the DPA is updated and strengthened, we're stuck with it.

Yes i think we are all aware of this. It is why it needs to be shown up in as high a profile as you can manage when someone transgresses what is acceptable.

Rather the point of any civilized system, and partially forums like this come to think of it.

Peter

Re: I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

Ever heard of the Contempt of Court Act, Peter?

Yes, but I know what it means, there is no court case here(yet), nor is there likely to be.


Ever heard of freedom of the press.

Peter

[bluebottle]

Re: I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

How?

I'm calling on my previous experience, here. If you are a Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) and you are informed that a criminal offence has been committed, the last thing you want or need is for the suspect(s) to be warned and anyone else connected with the offence to be warned. By catching them unawares, it gives them little, if any, chance of concocting a story to get themselves and others connected with it off the hook. From what the OP has said, it sounds like information of a financial and, also, of a legal or quasi-legal nature was disposed of in a totally irresponsible manner. Some of this information is likely to be of a very sensitive nature. Where court proceedings are concerned, a person accused of a criminal offence is entitled to a fair hearing, a right enshrined in law under the Human Rights Act. If details of the case are circulated in the public domain prior to the hearing, how can that person be guaranteed a fair hearing, eh?

[bluebottle]

Re: I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

Hi Peter,

I love banter.....the fact is............ that is what it is..... a breach of the Act it is not deemed criminal unless a Court says it is......but the ICO is a toothless tiger..........my issue similar to this got so heavy that it invoolved my MP who was brilliant he called the then ICO commissioner to his office and told him to use the powers he had been given........nothing much happened.....all I got was another visit from an ICO enforcement officer .......who came straight out and told me that they did not have the money to prosecute all the cases that could have been prosecuted.....so nothing really happens they just get fined ...........hands smacked and tpld to go away be good boy....stinks........and I agree that along with the complaint is ........get the media involved

Ref above ......having information about other people is not a criminal offence ........it is a breach of the Act....passing on that information is another breach of the Act .....both become Criminal only when ruled so by the Court........but only then.........only if and when the iCO takes action via the Court would it be deemed criminal...if no action is taken it remains merely a breach........took me a lot of arguing with the ICO to get my head round this.........I still don't agree but have to accept it


Sparkie

When a person is charged and proceeded against for a criminal offence, the purpose of the court hearing is to determine whether the person is guilty or not guilty of the offence they are charged with having committed. An offence is deemed criminal by statute, not by a court. Since 6 April 2010, the ICO has used FPNs as a way of dealing with infringements of the DPA. However, if, during the course of an investigation, it becomes clear that any criminal offences have been committed, the ICO are obliged to inform the police who are tasked with the investigation of offences under the Criminal Law.

With regard to having information about other people and passing it others without the consent of those to whom the information relates, yes, it is a breach of the DPA, provided the information is not used for any criminal purpose, e.g. to commit Fraud, Blackmail or Burglary. However, if the information has been obtained as the result of a criminal act, e.g. Theft or Burglary, it then becomes stolen property. If personal information is used to commit criminal acts against the person or persons to whom the personal information relates, it then becomes a matter for the ICO AND the police.

A case involving A4e highlighted this. An A4e employee's home was burgled and a laptop holding unencrypted clients' details was stolen. Some clients suffered loss as a result. The ICO dealt with the DPA issues whilst the police dealt with the criminal issues.

Confusing? Frustrating? Yes, it can be very frustrating when someone has used your personal information without your permission, but, unfortunately, until the DPA is updated and strengthened, we're stuck with it.

Re: I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

I think the fact of the matter, is that they are much more likely to settle this quietly if they are allowed.

Sometimes it takes a bit of public pressure to get things done.

I wont insult anyone intelligence by listing examples

Peter

Re: I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

I totally agree, Labman. If ICO decide to pursue a prosecution instead of an FPN, any prior media coverage could jeopardise the case.

How?

[bluebottle]

Re: I've found paperwork dumped by a bailiff!

Therein lies your problem. An ordinary member of the public with no knowledge of the ICO, fine, take it to a police station. However Skally is no longer that, as they now know about the ICO, I provided the name and a phone number, Bluebottle followed by concurring and providing a website URL. The ICO is the way to approach this abuse of the DPA.

Going to the press would potentially jeopardise the probity of any investigation, and that should not be risked, especially as any outcome is quite likely to end up being published in the press in due time anyway.

Skally, for what it's worth, I think you're doing the correct thing.

I totally agree, Labman. If ICO decide to pursue a prosecution instead of an FPN, any prior media coverage could jeopardise the case.