Energy Firm passed my data on

bandana22

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

Well if they won't improve their offer to something you find acceptable, you'll need to claim against them.


You may find useful step by step guidance on the earlier CAG link or here: legalbeagles.info/forums/forum/legal-forums/general-legal-issues/1434580-urgent-data-protection-act-1998-breac

My current position is that I have invited the company to re look at the case given the ruling from the ICO. I await their response.

I have not made any demand for any amount.

I have looked at the thread on the link and it is indeed lengthy and complicated. That case seems to be tarnished by the emotional aspect of the claimant. That is never a good thing.

Facts only.

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth

bandana22 wrote: »

My current position is that I have invited the company to re look at the case given the ruling from the ICO. I await their response.

I have not made any demand for any amount.

I have looked at the thread on the link and it is indeed lengthy and complicated. That case seems to be tarnished by the emotional aspect of the claimant. That is never a good thing.

Facts only.

I’m getting the popcorn in for this! OP you were offered £50 for a genuine error, it happens. But although you say you have no demands, I sense you are hoping the cash tills start ringing in your favour. They are not going to.

I would take their offer, head off the the wobbleade emporium, have a decent meal and be done with it.

Ganga

Well i think that all the people who critisize are wrong,bandana22 you should demand at least £100,000,the person who passed on your information should be publically hanged and the the person who phoned you should be flogged within an inch of their life to make an example so this never happens again,!!!!!!, get on with your life,put this behind you and join the real world.

bandana22

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth wrote: »

I’m getting the popcorn in for this! OP you were offered £50 for a genuine error, it happens. But although you say you have no demands, I sense you are hoping the cash tills start ringing in your favour. They are not going to.

I would take their offer, head off the the wobbleade emporium, have a decent meal and be done with it.

Wrong.

There was an error that would have been avoidable had the company had the correct procedures in place. They did'nt.

I don't have any offer on the table currently. They did offer me £50 before I made the complaint to ICO. I said no.

ICO has now ruled. Ball back in company's court. So I am giving them the opportunity to re look at the case. They may or may not make an offer as a result.

Enjoy the popcorn .....

bandana22

Ganga wrote: »

Well i think that all the people who critisize are wrong,bandana22 you should demand at least £100,000,the person who passed on your information should be publically hanged and the the person who phoned you should be flogged within an inch of their life to make an example so this never happens again,!!!!!!, get on with your life,put this behind you and join the real world.

Now .... hmmm ... the £100,000 .... yeah I could see myself going for that.

As for the public hanging and the flogging ..... might need to think about that one if they do offer that ..... just does sound a touch harsh ....... though that might just be me.

powerful_Rogue

I can see your replies going one of two ways.

The company will offer you £500 along with a hamper of the finest meats available in the United Kingdom.

They wont respond, you'll take them to the small claims court, get awarded £1000 and a tattooed apology on the rump of the CEO.

Manxman_in_exile

bandana22 wrote: »

My current position is that I have invited the company to re look at the case given the ruling from the ICO. I await their response.

I have not made any demand for any amount.

I have looked at the thread on the link and it is indeed lengthy and complicated. That case seems to be tarnished by the emotional aspect of the claimant. That is never a good thing.

Facts only.

True. But the facts hidden behind all the emotional rubbish about defamation etc are: (1) the ICO had ruled that the OP's data had been breached; (2) the breach was not serious; and (3) the OP was advised it would be very difficult to claim for distress.


There is also reference to a decided case which appears to hold that the fact that a data breach has occurred does not by itself necessarily entitle a claimant to compensation - which you do not seem to agree with?


Go ahead and claim if you wish. It's your time.

bandana22

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

I can see your replies going one of two ways.

The company will offer you £500 along with a hamper of the finest meats available in the United Kingdom.

They wont respond, you'll take them to the small claims court, get awarded £1000 and a tattooed apology on the rump of the CEO.

The £500 and hamper ..... yeah .... I'd be good for that too.

The £1000 ... yeah ... go with that as well.

As for having to read the apology from the CEO's rump ......... er ...... can I pass on that one?

powerful_Rogue

I hope you're not totally relying on the ICO ruling if you take this to court.

bandana22

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

True. But the facts hidden behind all the emotional rubbish about defamation etc are: (1) the ICO had ruled that the OP's data had been breached; (2) the breach was not serious; and (3) the OP was advised it would be very difficult to claim for distress.


There is also reference to a decided case which appears to hold that the fact that a data breach has occurred does not by itself necessarily entitle a claimant to compensation - which you do not seem to agree with?


Go ahead and claim if you wish. It's your time.

Agree with all of the above.

Claims for distress is subjective. So it may or may not be awarded. However, the fact that the ICO found there was a breach would mean that I have a case.
In addition, I gave the company every opportunity to review its position prior to making the complaint to the ICO. I asked them to reconsider their position on the reason for incorrectly passing my data and to review the £50 gesture. They choose not to and issued the deadlock letter.

If a breach has occurred then the subject is entitled to make a claim. The ICO judgement does strengthen the case. Whether compensation is awarded or not would be down to the judge. So, it is possible to win the case but not win compensation. They are two different things. However, for no compensation to awarded, the judge would have to rule there was no distress involved. I'd find that a little difficult to believe given the case of being chased by debt collectors etc.

Personally I think there was distress ....... actually I know there was .... I felt it. How much is that distress worth? That's the issue.