Anyone fancy ringing the ICO

[Seminole]

You may have read my Abbey DPA defence thread in the Abbey forum. DLA wrote to me yesterday saying that the ICO has given a preliminary view that Abbey's microfiche system was not a relevant filing system. I've faxed the IC asking for copies of the terms of reference of the review and whatever report they've issued.

 

I'm itching to follow this up with a phone call to the IC but it might be interesting if someone else could ring their consumer helpline first to get the party line without mentioning the DLA letter.

 

I would be fascinated to know how they approach this. Will they simply say that you can make a complaint or will they inform the caller about the view Abbey claim they have expressed? If it's the latter then it leads to a suspicion that either they are dealing with this incompentently or they are flouting their public interest role.

[mahala]

whats the number ? lol

 

edited: it's ringing...

[mahala]

...

 

"I'm sorry, all our operators are busy and your call is in a queue. You call will be answered as soon as an operator is free"

[mahala]

OK then

 

Just spoken to a lovely lady. The IC's banking team are looking into the microfiche argument, due to the number of complaints received. They have split the banks up, and each person in the team is looking at a couple of banks. The initial feeling is that banks cannot rely on the fact that information is stored on mircofiche as a reason not to supply that information under the DPA and also cannot charge the extra they have been asking for.

 

They are urging people to put their complaints in writing so that they can be passed on to the person dealing with that specific bank. They will publish their finding when they complete the investigation and if necessary look into individual complaints.

 

My question was "is it true that my bank do not have to supply information stored on microfiche under the DPA, because microfiche is not a relevant filing system"

 

It seemed to me that they are looking at each bank individually to ascertain if each bank has a relevant filing system.

 

Any thoughts?

[Seminole]

Thanks for that. It's what I was expecting that they would say. Did you specifically ask about Abbey?

[mahala]

I did but I got a general answer. I was also told that if I submit a complaint now it would take a few weeks to be assigned a case officer.

[mahala]

Just thinking through what I was told - if they are currently investigating the systems and have yet to come to any conclusions, how can Abbey have been told that theirs is not a relevant filing system?

 

Was also told that a relevant filing system had to have an index and subdividers ...

 

 

sorry this is coming in dribs and drabs ... am trying to feed a baby at the same time ... brain cells are disappearing lol

[Bookworm]

Well, stop feeding the baby your brain cells and try some mashed banana instead!!!

[mahala]

Well, stop feeding the baby your brain cells and try some mashed banana instead!!!

 

lol he still prefers boob ... and as everyone knows, braincells leak out through breastmilk lol

 

[/off topic]

 

 

Anyway, now had time to think a bit and I think this strengths the case against Abbey, unless of course the IC are telling us one thing and Abbey another.

[alanfromderby]

Yuk.....too much information on this thread!!!!! :o

[lynzpower]

I rang the ICO with this point the other day.

 

I have spoken to 2 different people and had 2 seperate answers 1) micropfiche IS relevant filing system

2) mfiche IS NOT a relevent filing system

 

I put it to them that data was HELD in it, they sadi that would look into it

[Seminole]

Hah! Now I know what the Abbey must have done. They rang the same number as you guys, asked the same question and the ICO gave the answer they wanted, they treated that as a preliminary view!