I wanna remove my details from 192.com

hpuse

myself79 wrote: »

So, I have a question. If I join clubs online, like from supermarkets, for children, etc. can my information be passed on to other parties and made public online?

Thanks a lot.

Two things here:

a) information being passed on to other third parties.

This really depends on their website "privacy policies". Basically the privacy policy applies at two levels. The first level as a normal visitor, and at a second level as a customer who purchases some product and services from the company who owns the website. Most companies will publish their website privacy policy (like cookies) and data privacy policy to their customers. If you are a customer, as per law, you must be given options to opt-out of they share your details with other third parties or affiliates. This can be done either by contacting them or possibly via online itself.

b) Infomation made public, online

This again depends on type of the company. For e.g when you join Boots.com to purchase something, you could be just a customer initially. However, boots.com has a parentingclub, and once you register or opt-in to that, that will have a separate privacy policy. If you are member of parenting club, you could possibly be having public page online showing your profile name. So be aware of services and products you are signing upto and talk to someone if you are unsure of.

Hope that helps.

rosygale

I'm opted out from the unlimited electoral register but my 2002 details are still available on 192.com for a fee. It's a problem as I have a rare name. If I was to laboriously print out, fill in and snail mail back to 192.com their C01 opt out form, isn't that just like confirming that the 2002 electoral register details they are holding for me are still current? Why should I have to rely on them removing the details? This makes a mockery of the measures we take for security.

Can't believe this is all perfectly legal. You should have to opt into their site, not opt out. 192.com are careful not to mention the people trying not to be reunited, or united with identity theft, in their blurb about families. Thanks for nothing, 192.com! :mad:

mmmsnow

They've also got the price of your house on 192.com. Obviously so the "family" that want to reunite with you can check if you're doing well before initiating contact!

What a crock.

Obviously_the_best

http://www.192.com/help/help-home/?#personalDetails
The removing personal details page of their website

Blackened

Pollo wrote: »

Hi all, my name is Alex and I am the PR Executive at 192.com.

I saw your posts, and thought I would try to answer your concerns.
192.com does not create new data on anyone, but puts data already in the public domain onto one website. Much of this information comes from the Edited Electoral roll, which you can opt out of when you register to vote.

You can also opt out of having your data on 192.com by filling out a CO1 form found on the site. (I'm not able to post a link).

I posted the CO1 opt-out form to 192.com TWICE in recent months, yet my 2002 electoral roll details are still up on the website. I never gave permission to 192.com or any other websites to make my personal details available to the whole world, and it is an absolute disgrace that 192.com assume they can share it.

It's typical of 192.com to use the excuse that it "puts data already in the public domain onto one website", but there is a huge difference between a public domain that restricts viewing under supervision at Council Offices where only hand written notes may be made, and one that publishes personal details for the whole wide world to access for a small fee.

rosygale

I google my own name every few weeks - this is the first time I've found anything. It has only gone up recently, despite being old data. There are doubtless many victims completely unaware that their details are available online, which makes it all the easier to trick them into giving out more details to identity thieves etc posing as legitimate enquirers. This could turn out to be a massive scandal yet.

hpuse

rosygale wrote: »

I google my own name every few weeks - this is the first time I've found anything. It has only gone up recently, despite being old data. There are doubtless many victims completely unaware that their details are available online, which makes it all the easier to trick them into giving out more details to identity thieves etc posing as legitimate enquirers. This could turn out to be a massive scandal yet.

I too sometimes Google my own name to find there are website like pipl.com caching personal data which is like at least 6 years old.

Yet_Another

Never mind

Thanks for your interest in the service, any questions please do get in contact via press 'at' 192.com.

This is a scandal fit for Question Time. Why is there no news coverage?

The site needs to be brought down and the law needs tightening before more unscrupulous corporations cash in on this loophole in the legislation, if that's what it is. If it's illegal, they should be sued into the ground. It's a disgrace. Millions of people will object to this mess, literally millions, nationwide.

The free list should have the addresses removed immediately. Google should be contacted to have the site removed.

...every search made on the site is logged.

Every address is currently listed on Google and others, and accessible directly with no registration process at all, and therefore viewable in anonymity by anyone in the world. The above snippet is an admission of error and possibly guilt - perhaps the precursor to a legal process.

[Deleted User]

Oh, and I just emailed my MP via http://www.writetothem.com

The law should be changed to prevent people putting this kind of information on the web.

[Deleted User]

I got a PM from Pollo, so here it is including my response:

Pollo wrote:

I am not responsible for the removal of details policy, so you are wrong to claim that I am.
The Data Protection Act requires the company to be sure that the person deleting a record is actually them, hence the need for a physical signature sent with a fax or a letter.

I have written to my MP about this. The short version is that Google seems to be okay with removing photos from Street View with only an email address. The Data Protection Act does not require you to confirm the identity in the case of merely removing a record that is not related to any kind of business relationship.

Besides which the DPA allows you to accept an electronic signature. When I contacted my MP I used such a signature. Merely writing a signature on some paper does not confirm someone's identity - how would you know it was mine and not one I just made up? If I sent you a letter addressed from my neighbour and signed how would you know it wasn't from them?

Hopefully Parliament will ban selling personal data gathered from public lists, but if not I'll move on to the EU level. I think there is a good case to be made under the European Convention on Human Rights, specifically the right to privacy.

You don't own my data, I do. You do not have my permission to use it, now or ever.