Skipton B.Soc Privacy policy email

ForumUser7

Damn, I need to get better at reading emails rather than just skimming them... Thanks to @x44 for flagging, will definitely be opting out. Very disappointing move from Skipton, and shocking that they believe they can do this without consent. Echo the sentiment about raising to the ICO, but unsure what they'll do tbh

masonic

Important point is that they've confirmed that this is not something they've recently started doing. They've just decided to be a bit more transparent about it and give people an opt out.

Fortunately I opted out of Facebook about 15 years ago, and never used the same email address for such things as I do for internet banking, so there'll be nothing to match in my case.

ForumUser7

Stolas said:

I wrote a complaint several days ago myself. 

I’ve also asked them to clarify if the address has already been shared, and if so, who with. Still waiting to see if they respond with anything meaningful. 

Did they respond @stolas?

7sefton

Rejection received today, exact same wording

Minded to escalate to FOS, partly out of spite so they’ll have to pay the referral fee

masonic

7sefton said:

Rejection received today, exact same wording

Minded to escalate to FOS, partly out of spite so they’ll have to pay the referral fee

A fee isn't charged if the complaint is viewed as being made out of spite. Or if the complaint is about something outside the scope of the FOS. I have no idea how the FOS would treat something like this.

A DSAR might be helpful in understanding more about the actual use of your data for this purpose and for how long it has been going on.

7sefton

masonic said:

7sefton said:

Rejection received today, exact same wording

Minded to escalate to FOS, partly out of spite so they’ll have to pay the referral fee

A fee isn't charged if the complaint is viewed as being made out of spite. Or if the complaint is about something outside the scope of the FOS. I have no idea how the FOS would treat something like this.

A DSAR might be helpful in understanding more about the actual use of your data for this purpose and for how long it has been going on.

Obviously wouldn’t say I was referring to FOS out of spite, and the Skipton final response says I’m free too refer to them (so assume it would be within their scope)

eskbanker

7sefton said:

masonic said:

7sefton said:

Rejection received today, exact same wording

Minded to escalate to FOS, partly out of spite so they’ll have to pay the referral fee

A fee isn't charged if the complaint is viewed as being made out of spite. Or if the complaint is about something outside the scope of the FOS. I have no idea how the FOS would treat something like this.

A DSAR might be helpful in understanding more about the actual use of your data for this purpose and for how long it has been going on.

Obviously wouldn’t say I was referring to FOS out of spite, and the Skipton final response says I’m free too refer to them (so assume it would be within their scope)

Financial institutions are obliged to include boilerplate text advising of FOS escalation rights when closing complaints, but that doesn't mean that these are within FOS scope, which is defined largely around regulated activities:

https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/DISP/2/3.html

masonic

While its a slightly different issue, IIRC there was a thread recently from an OP complaining that the FOS wouldn't take up their complaint as it fell outside their remit. It was in relation to a number of misdirected emails the OP received containing information intended for another customer.

eskbanker

masonic said:

While its a slightly different issue, IIRC there was a thread recently from an OP complaining that the FOS wouldn't take up their complaint as it fell outside their remit. It was in relation to a number of misdirected emails the OP received containing information intended for another customer.

And likewise there have been multiple past threads in which FOS have rejected complaints about complaint handling itself.

7sefton

I'll try it anyway, thanks though