DPA - Inspecting files for manual intervention?

[jonni2bad]

If a bank (or similar organisation) responds to a request for details of manual intervention as part of your DPA request by stating that it does not have to supply this - possibly due to a disproportionate effort - then do we have a right to view the information ourselves, at the bank's premises?

 

I ask because of THIS_WEB_PAGE

 

and this line of text...

"The data controller can refuse to supply a permanent copy of the data if this is not possible or would involve disproportionate effort. You are still entitled to inspect the information at the data controller’s premises."

 

If this is the case, how many of us would like to see those files ourselves? And how much time would those lovely banks have to put aside in order to assist us?!!

 

I guess it would also assist anyone who has to defend themselves IN COURT by being able to show that none occured...

[Robertxc]

A very interesting article. Unfortunately, I can't find any reference to this anywhere in the DPA itself, save where inspection is ordered by a court.

 

This would be a big stick to wield indeed for those people whose banks are being difficult about releasing information.

[diddled]

Disproportionate effort was used as an excuse by an organisation that I requested info from, however they invited me to make an appointment to inspect the data at their premises.

A day or so before I was due to inspect, they telephoned me with the excuse that they would not be available on that day, they didn't know when they would be free and they resisted my request to allow inspection of the data in the presence of another member of their staff.

This company had been illegally instructed by our bank to act as LPA Receivers.

 

I realise this doesn't help with your question, its just meant to demonstate the dirty tricks they deploy at each and every stage.

[Robertxc]

Curioser and curioser. I've been having a trawl through Google looking for instances of "Data Protection Act 1998" and "inspect", and I would say that what relevant references I've found have been about 50/50 that you either do have the right or you don't. The fact that the web page quoted above is actualy the Liberty website tends to lend it quite a bit of credibility.

 

I'm about to make a DPA request to a bank which I know is going to try and get out of it. I want to make sure I send in a knockout blow, so to speak, so that they just send me the info.

[jonni2bad]

Another forum user - Lorraine - has used the text I quoted to her bank, who had previously replied with the typical "disproportionate effort" line....

 

POST HERE

 

Although no feedback on their reply yet.....

[Spiceskull]

Google search on "disproportionate effort" threw this up as the first result:

 

http://www.dpa.lancs.ac.uk/approved/research.htm

 

Interesting to note that it is a DPA site...

 

See the steps I took to get my bank charges back.

Spiceskull v HSBC.

Thank you Consumer Action Group.

Read my blog.

 

[Robertxc]

Hmmmm. If it isn't explicitly mentioned in the DPA I would expect them to be quite difficult about it. I imagine they would rather have bubonic plague than allow their customers to paw through their records.

 

I think I'll give the Information Commissioner a quick call tomorrow for clarification.

 

See the steps I took to get my bank charges back.

Spiceskull v HSBC.

Thank you Consumer Action Group.

Read my blog.

 

[diddled]

Information Commissioner - DPA 1998 - Legal Guidance

Chapter 4.1 says -

Disproportionate effort is not defined in the Act. Accordingly it will be a question of fact in each case as to whether the supply of information in permanent form amounts to disproportionate effort. Matters to be taken into account by the Commissioner may be the cost of provision of the information, the length of time it may take to provide the information, how difficult or otherwise it may be for the data controller to provide the information and also the size of the organisation of which the request has been made. Such matters will always be balanced against the effect on the data subject.

[Spiceskull]

Such matters will always be balanced against the effect on the data subject.

I would have thought that the effect on the data subject was of critical importance - the information is required to prove that the data controller has acted in an illegal manner, to the detriment of the data subject...when faced with that argument, 'disproportionate effort' should not even enter the equation.

 

See the steps I took to get my bank charges back.

Spiceskull v HSBC.

Thank you Consumer Action Group.

Read my blog.

 

[jonni2bad]

My over-riding thought to this is that if the bank DOES have any record of manual intervention, then surely it would be held in a manner that was easily accessible?

 

If so, then providing it would not require disproportionate effort.

 

If they hold such information of some archaic filing system, then fine, but why would an organisation like a bank revert to the 70's 'technology' of ring-binders?

 

I do realise that, most likely, banks just use this excuse because they don't have the evidence, and don't want to admit it, but the more we find out about this, perhaps the more amunition we have if anyone ever reaches a court room...

[diddled]

I believe that Banks deliberately keep their manual notes etc in unstructured files to avoid disclosure under DPA 1998.

[Robertxc]

I had a chat with the IC this morning, and apparently they are aware that because of the number of people now going to banks to get their statements - and then going to get their cash back - the banks' way of dealing with it is constantly evolving. The latest idea seems to be to make it as hard as possible for people to get hold of the information they need to recover their charges. Presumably, the reasoning is (probably correctly), that most people only have at most a couple of months worth of statements. The lady said that one of the teams at the IC is currently in the midst of a major argument with one of the banks about whether or not bank statements are covered by the DPA. As far as the IC is concerned, they are.

 

Interestingly, she also said that the bank is NOT obliged to let you come in and inspect the records yourself, but it might be unreasonable for you to refuse if they offer. Go figure.

[Candice]

It wasn't so long ago I read that the banks were using "the investment in all our technology" story to justify unlawful charges, but magically everything now seems to be paper based. Go figure.

[jonni2bad]

This topic was closed on 03/07/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group