I was refused entry in a local B&M store today

nero33

Hi

I walked into a B&M store today and was stopped by a security guard just as I stepped into the store.

He said face recognition had set off an alarm.

So I asked if I could try it again and it did set off his alarm.

So we went outside and he explained it was either for shoplifting (absolutely not!) or being argumentative etc to staff or causing a nuisance or damage in-store.

None of the above has happened by the way.

I went to the same B&M last week with a relative without any issues.  No alarms etc and we were there for about 10mins.  Whilst relative queued up at till, I went next door to another store.

Where do I stand with regards to their decision?  I probably wouldn't want to set foot in another B&M after today's humiliating experience but security said the information is shared amongst other stores who use this organisation's technology and it'll set their alarms off if I enter.

Their name of the face recognition company is: "FaceWatch".  This was the poster in the window.



Who can I contact to find out the reason for my banning?  Can I access that info etc?  I have absolutely no clue about these things but I couldn't face being stopped at another, different store.

Thanks and apologies for long post but today was an awful day for me.

elsien

You need to make a subject access request if you want to find why.
Here’s an example of how it works, or rather  doesn’t work in a lot of cases. Even if they have made a mistake, they may not admit it.

https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/blog/the-spectator-has-your-local-shop-blacklisted-you/#:~:text=crime%20or%20disorder'.-,You%20won't%20be%20informed%20if%20your%20photo%20is%20taken,Direct%2C%20Flannels%20and%20Home%20Bargains.

nero33

elsien said:

You need to make a subject access request if you want to find why.
Here’s an example of how it works, or rather  doesn’t work in a lot of cases. Even if they haven’t made a mistake, they may not admit it.

https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/blog/the-spectator-has-your-local-shop-blacklisted-you/#:~:text=crime%20or%20disorder'.-,You%20won't%20be%20informed%20if%20your%20photo%20is%20taken,Direct%2C%20Flannels%20and%20Home%20Bargains.

They've definitely made a mistake. I didn't touch anything in-store.  Didn't buy anything.  Didn't speak to any staff or other customers. 

Ideally I'd like some video evidence showing what my alleged transgression was.

I understand stores can serve who they wish to and can refuse to serve you without an explanation (I think that's a thing)!  But to ban someone without explanation doesn't seem right or fair 

Will look at the link you posted.  Thanks

nero33

elsien said:

You need to make a subject access request if you want to find why.
Here’s an example of how it works, or rather  doesn’t work in a lot of cases. Even if they have made a mistake, they may not admit it.

https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/blog/the-spectator-has-your-local-shop-blacklisted-you/#:~:text=crime%20or%20disorder'.-,You%20won't%20be%20informed%20if%20your%20photo%20is%20taken,Direct%2C%20Flannels%20and%20Home%20Bargains.

Reading that article and the example of 'Anna', it's unlikely they'll offer any help other than take my official ID off me.  At the moment they have nothing other than images of me but no name.  I'm not sure I want to give that to them if they won't resolve the situation.

Quite scary stuff in that article.

Aylesbury_Duck

Presumably you simply look very like someone who has caused a problem.  I doubt there's anything you can do about it, and nor do I expect them to be inclined to do anything, either.

nero33

Aylesbury_Duck said:

Presumably you simply look very like someone who has caused a problem.  I doubt there's anything you can do about it, and nor do I expect them to be inclined to do anything, either.

I had been to a Home Bargains and Asda prior to that without an issue so that's promising.  I'll test a few more stores this week with a relative to see if I'm welcome there.

Very depressing.  

Aylesbury_Duck

How good is the technology?  I'd have some fun and go back to B&M in glasses or a fake beard to see what happens.

Okell

Are there not GDPR issues here?

Presumably in order to recognise the OP there must be some kind of image of him both stored and processed somewhere.

Is that covered and permitted by GDPR?

elsien

It can be, yes.
The ICO published an opinion several years ago - not sure if it's been reconsidered since then. Note - it's very long!
ico-opinion-the-use-of-lfr-in-public-places-20210618.pdf
This thread relates to shops but I'm not sure how much the general public is aware of the use of biometric technology generally and its implications. Although the more recent wave of riots and arrests does show that we are recorded far more than many of us realise. 

PragmaticMoneySaver

Their use and storage etc is deemed as lawful as in the excerpt elsein posted; however the one thing I personally think they are on shaky ground with is the way they are using the systems without human decision making.  The Data Protection Act (incorporating GDPR) provides for an individual to object to solely automated decisions, including those based on profiling, must not have a significant impact on individuals without proper safeguards. 

The way they are saying it 'flagged' indicates entirely automated decision making to me.

HopeAndDriftWood

PragmaticMoneySaver said:

Their use and storage etc is deemed as lawful as in the excerpt elsein posted; however the one thing I personally think they are on shaky ground with is the way they are using the systems without human decision making.  The Data Protection Act (incorporating GDPR) provides for an individual to object to solely automated decisions, including those based on profiling, must not have a significant impact on individuals without proper safeguards. 

The way they are saying it 'flagged' indicates entirely automated decision making to me.

Is the human element not the security guard "deciding" to refuse access?