Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • boomshaka
    • By boomshaka 14th Sep 18, 5:25 PM
    • 1Posts
    • 1Thanks
    boomshaka
    Compensation Claim for Bank Exposing Balance to Colleague
    • #1
    • 14th Sep 18, 5:25 PM
    Compensation Claim for Bank Exposing Balance to Colleague 14th Sep 18 at 5:25 PM
    Hello. Hoping someone with a bit of knowledge or similar experience could share their thoughts.

    My bank exposed my bank balance and the details of 4 transactions I had made to a former colleague of mine.
    I changed my mobile phone number, but they did not change it in all systems. About 1 month later one of these systems sent an SMS to my old number, which was now in use by a former colleague.
    Obviously this has been incredibly embarrassing since that colleague could see exactly how much (or little ) money I had in my account.

    I have been offered 250 compensation for the distress, and have been assured that the issue has been fixed. I don't really know how I feel about this offer...
    On the one hand it somehow feels inadequate and I'd have expected something a little more substantial, though on the other I'm typically not the sort of person who goes around looking for "freebies" or a hand out. But more importantly I don't know what I am ENTITLED to, if such an entitlement is indeed stipulated somewhere.

    If I rejected this offer and went to the Ombudsman, would I be likely to be awarded something more substantial? Or is 250 fairly typical in these issues?

    Thank you for any insight.
Page 2
    • kinger101
    • By kinger101 15th Sep 18, 11:26 AM
    • 4,466 Posts
    • 6,208 Thanks
    kinger101
    S/He's already getting compensation and is asking what s/he is entitled to.
    Originally posted by soulsaver
    I know. My original post was to correct those who implied that compensation is only due when there is a consequential loss.

    In this instance, pursuing it further would be foolish. A court might decide 100 pound is ample, which wouldn't cover even a fraction of the legal costs.
    Last edited by kinger101; 15-09-2018 at 11:28 AM.
    • dunstonh
    • By dunstonh 15th Sep 18, 11:29 AM
    • 94,483 Posts
    • 62,422 Thanks
    dunstonh
    82.1 GDPR

    Any person who has suffered material or non-material damage as a result of an infringement of this Regulation shall have the right to receive compensation from the controller or processor for the damage suffered.
    For the damage covered. So, what is the damage?

    On the one hand it somehow feels inadequate and I'd have expected something a little more substantial
    For an extremely minor breach, it is seems more than adequate.

    If I rejected this offer and went to the Ombudsman, would I be likely to be awarded something more substantial? Or is 250 fairly typical in these issues?
    100-250 is the dominant range of FOS awards.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). Comments are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
    • Ergates
    • By Ergates 15th Sep 18, 12:03 PM
    • 93 Posts
    • 158 Thanks
    Ergates
    Case law has established that distress alone is grounds for compensation when data protection laws have been breached.

    Vidal-Hall v Google Inc
    TLT v Secretary of State for the Home Department.
    Originally posted by kinger101
    82.1 GDPR

    Any person who has suffered material or non-material damage as a result of an infringement of this Regulation shall have the right to receive compensation from the controller or processor for the damage suffered.
    Originally posted by kinger101
    When actual distress has been caused, which would have to be proven in court. It's not an automatic entitlement just because a breach has occurred.
    • kinger101
    • By kinger101 15th Sep 18, 12:44 PM
    • 4,466 Posts
    • 6,208 Thanks
    kinger101
    When actual distress has been caused, which would have to be proven in court. It's not an automatic entitlement just because a breach has occurred.
    Originally posted by Ergates
    I never said it was automatic. The fact it's distressed OP has been acknowledged by the bank.
    • IanManc
    • By IanManc 15th Sep 18, 12:47 PM
    • 647 Posts
    • 1,148 Thanks
    IanManc
    When actual distress has been caused, which would have to be proven in court. It's not an automatic entitlement just because a breach has occurred.
    Originally posted by Ergates
    And the case law talks about "distress", not being a bit embarrassed or quite annoyed.

    After all, in this case a former colleague got to find out about four transactions on an account. I wouldn't be pleased about that, but it would take a lot more than that to cause me "distress".

    I think a sense of proportion is needed.

    If I were offered 250 in such a situation I'd snatch their hand off before they changed their minds.
    • veryintrigued
    • By veryintrigued 15th Sep 18, 12:48 PM
    • 2,483 Posts
    • 1,961 Thanks
    veryintrigued
    Let's hope your colleagues not reading this.....

    Now that would be embarrassing.
    • IanManc
    • By IanManc 15th Sep 18, 12:54 PM
    • 647 Posts
    • 1,148 Thanks
    IanManc
    Let's hope your colleagues not reading this.....

    Now that would be embarrassing.
    Originally posted by veryintrigued
    To whom is that comment meant to be directed?
    • kinger101
    • By kinger101 15th Sep 18, 1:09 PM
    • 4,466 Posts
    • 6,208 Thanks
    kinger101
    And the case law talks about "distress", not being a bit embarrassed or quite annoyed.

    After all, in this case a former colleague got to find out about four transactions on an account. I wouldn't be pleased about that, but it would take a lot more than that to cause me "distress".

    I think a sense of proportion is needed.

    If I were offered 250 in such a situation I'd snatch their hand off before they changed their minds.
    Originally posted by IanManc
    You're making a distinction that is purely semantic. Being embarrassed or annoyed would be encompassed within distress. If you check the Google case, it's actually rather trivial stuff. Someone seeing some ads because of cookies. It seems thinner skins can to taken into account.

    The new statute doesn't make reference to distress or anxiety, it just includes "non-material" damage.

    I very much doubt a judge would view the 250 as unreasonable. I was merely establishing that where data protection breaches occur, damages are not limited to financial loss.
    • Barny1979
    • By Barny1979 15th Sep 18, 1:20 PM
    • 4,171 Posts
    • 45,237 Thanks
    Barny1979
    Do we know that the information provided enabled the individual to be identified, or was it the case the individual was identified by the fact the colleague knew it was his old phone?
    • Heng Leng
    • By Heng Leng 15th Sep 18, 1:25 PM
    • 4,607 Posts
    • 1,458 Thanks
    Heng Leng
    You gave them a number that was never secure in the first place.

    There is zero expectation of that you'd have sole access to that number from day one.
    • kinger101
    • By kinger101 15th Sep 18, 1:59 PM
    • 4,466 Posts
    • 6,208 Thanks
    kinger101
    You gave them a number that was never secure in the first place.

    There is zero expectation of that you'd have sole access to that number from day one.
    Originally posted by Heng Leng
    Seems a rather facile argument. They notified the bank of the change of number. Even landline numbers are recycled. Likewise, for addresses, people move house.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,773Posts Today

8,500Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @Dora_Haf: @MartinSLewis So many people on here saying they're great until you get your PROPER job. What if Your proper job Is ON zero?

  • RT @hslt88: @MartinSLewis I?m a trustee for a youth charity. We only have a limited pool of funds for flexible youth workers for holiday sc?

  • RT @Dan_i_elle_88: @MartinSLewis Loved working zero hour agency care work. Never out of work and I loved having the flexibility! Only left?

  • Follow Martin