What would be???

[JAN1471]

Hi,

 

My main first post.

 

What would be consider a break of data protection???

 

I have just rung Fredickson Inter and pretended to be my husband, gave all the relevant security info that they requested'

 

And been told that I have broken the data protection act by verifying all the relevant info.

 

I told them, that I got the info re address and dob from his bin. They asked how I could verify info and I said from his bin, I told them that I would be making a complaint to the Information com, as they had no idea as to who I could be, with info from his bin, the fact that I gave in and told them I was his wife by releasing how much he owed to said company after I did sec, but before telling them I was his wife, would this constute, a break of data protection, even though I released the info after, he told me how much owed. Would this be a break????

 

They told me that I had broken data protection

 

 

I would like to know:)

[version302003]

I'm supprised that they didnt realise you were female

[worried parent]

Interesting question about the Data Protection Act.

 

Would passing on someone's address without their permission be classed as breaking the Act.

[JAN1471]

No, me too??/ I tried to put on a husky a voice, well as husky as possible and they asked twice are you Mr ***** and I said yes and verified all the relvant details and then got them by saying thanks very much you have just broken data protection, they then told me how much he owes(we already know) and then I got put htrough to a sup, after being told by a monkey and sup, that I had broken the rules.

 

I can also claim that I was in the middle of a hypo, when they were called back, as I am a type 1 diabetic, if they say I did anything wrong.

Edited April 4, 2009 by JAN1471

[mr.ton]

A bit rich from a DCA lecturing anyone else about breaking rules

Im sure they will think up a punishment for you

[JAN1471]

Yeah the naughty chair, but my backside won't fit, not unless they've got an extra large one.

Edited April 4, 2009 by JAN1471

[JAN1471]

I'm waiting for the next time when Fredrickson's ring Gaz as it will be fun, to see if they complain that I have rung them. As I also had fun as I kept ringing one of their 01 numbers as we don't pay for calls to 01 numbers for the first hour, I had the phone on secrecy, while listening to the monkeys going "hello Fredrickson,hello Fredrickson". so they know how it feels to be harrassed on the phone.;-)

[diamondgirl]

fantastic but dont forget to withhold your number DG

[JAN1471]

I did:D. Fredickson's also said that they had not broken OFT rules last night by not going to our appointed representatives and that came from a sup.

Edited April 4, 2009 by JAN1471

[WelshMam2009]

So...this explains it!! DCA's thinking DPA is there to govern us and not them!! DOH...how thick am I!!!!

 

Now lets see what the law says about DPA...

 

An Act to make new provision for the regulation of the processing of information relating to individuals, including the obtaining, holding, use or disclosure of such information

 

Interesting....perhaps you should ask them next time which specific section and clause you are breaching exactly as I can only find obligations for THEM to do things correctly and not us!!

[ashmk]

Am I missing something here ? I dont see how fredricksons have broke data protection rules. They asked they security questions and you answered them.

As for the voice you could have been a really camp bloke for all they knew.

 

I hate freds and other DCA's as much as the next guy but I fail to see how freds have done wrong. They asked all the correct questions and got correct answers.

 

If anything the op is in the wrong and not freds.

 

Mabey im missing something.

[WelshMam2009]

Am I missing something here ? I dont see how fredricksons have broke data protection rules. They asked they security questions and you answered them.

As for the voice you could have been a really camp bloke for all they knew.

 

I hate freds and other DCA's as much as the next guy but I fail to see how freds have done wrong. They asked all the correct questions and got correct answers.

 

If anything the op is in the wrong and not freds.

 

Mabey im missing something.

 

Ok, tell which part of the DPA the OP was contravening??

 

Fred's were wrong in so far as they threatened the caller by stating that she had contravened DPA.

 

As regards the initial post, then I don't actually believe that Freds disclosing info to someone, whom they reasonably believed to be the debtor, was in breach of DPA as they appear to have a resonable system in place to verify the callers identity.

[ashmk]

As regards the initial post, then I don't actually believe that Freds disclosing info to someone, whom they reasonably believed to be the debtor, was in breach of Data Protection Act as they appear to have a resonable system in place to verify the callers identity.

 

Thats all i was refering to.

[JAN1471]

Surely this proves a point, with Dca's, they can not prove who the hell they are talking to when anyone phones them, as I said to their sup last night I could have got all the relevant info, from his bin and then I would have passed their security checks and yet again they would have broken the rules once again, by divulging how much and to whom, I could have given the info to my dad and asked him to call. Which once again calls into question that their security checks aren't strong enough as I proved last night. Because they thought that they were talking to Mr *******, because I verified all relevant info, they had no idea that they weren't talking to him, untill I told them.

 

And it also goes the other way, how can we prove that when a Dca calls, that we are actually talking to the said Dca and not Joe Bloggs down the road who has got hold of all the relevant info on us.

 

The sup I spoke to last night, went on to tell me that they would now put everything in writing to us, from now, which I said was what we had wanted all along, as he told me that gary had given this number for him to be called on and I said that this was my home as well and that they were harrassing me in my own home.

 

Well surprise,surprise, the sup lied, Gaz has just had them on the phone, he picked it up and answered it, they said Fredrickson Inter and he replied "You've got to be F***ing kidding me, bye "and put the phone down

Edited April 4, 2009 by JAN1471

[42man]

Jan....can you update your thread please....if you have received a court claim, you have to acknowledge the claim within 14 days of the date on the claim form, stating that you want to defend ALL (if that is what you want to do), then you get a further 14+3 days in which to submit a defence....and yes sending a CPR31.14 is the first stage....what are the Particulars Of The Claim - there is another thread here if you need help, but if you aren't sure please shout.... - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/199271-county-court-claim-please.html