Information Commissioner's Office Opiniões 510

totally inept at every level . What is even the purpose of it? I complained direct to the head John Edward's by email. Not once has he ever replied. If I could say no stars i would.
Not fit for purpose

The previous Government organisation I worked for, twice breached my sensitive data, only to deny it. After gathering overwhelming evidence and presenting it to the ICO, they took the word of my previous employer. Absolutely devastated but after exhaustive work on my behalf, I finally gathered 100% evidence, proving my previous employer had lied from day one of my allegations. I presented this to the ICO who updated their records to state 2 data breaches had occurred and then closed my case, stating they are under no obligation to do anything else!!! A Government organisation can deceive the ICO and face absolutely no punishment or consequences. I am taking my case to court but no thanks to the uninterested, toothless ICO. 97% of reviews giving 1* speaks volumes.

As others have commented the Information Commissioner’s Office has an internet form which you must fill in.

The problem is that it wouldn’t let me input the evidence.

If you state the evidence will have to come by email, it gets lost from the form - then the case is closed because your email input evidence doesn’t exist.

Trying to find out why it had this problem, it appears that complainants can only I see small amounts of evidence as their system is set that way

The Information Commissioner’s Office vexed my request for trying to point this out ….and suggest the levels be raised.

If anyone else’s evidence has gone missing, please write a review of it in this site.

I intend to take this further so any more evidence welcome.

To echo others, about as useful as a chocolate teapot. The ICO published a document containing incorrect and out of date information about me. Now this document is splattered all over the Internet and I'm the one trying to clean it up.
So, what I'm, saying is they broke the Act of Parliament which is their only job to police and enforce! Useless! Like others, wish I could give 0 stars. Am i worried they will read this and be upset? Nope, 'cos they haven't claimed their profile, so ignorant and stupid!

criminal data breach re Medical information(on 7 ocassions) by Dyfed Powys Police,already made complaint with professional standards department which decided there was no wrong doing!, contacted ICO with all the evidence and i was told that police will contact me to sort this out,ICO totally spineless

ICO is another body of the government entirely corrupt. If you complaint against a public administration in the UK, they will not take any action. ENTIRELY CORRUPT

They are useless, they can't investigate anything even if you provide enough evidence.Three months ago I presented evidence and now after three mounths they ask me again to present the same evidence. If the Government changed the management of the ICO because all the people gave it a star, surely many of us would be happy. So don't be under the illusion that they are investigating, because they probably don't have enough knowledge of how they should be investigating. I would give zero stars, but I know it's not possible.😏😡

Complete disgrace!!!
I have made a complaint, after previously talking with one of their advisors, via chat helpline.
That advisor, plus a specialist employment licensing solicitor told me that my concerns are correct and I am fully entitled to register a Complaint.
After registering the Complaint, in their " professional " manner of work they said that : it is lawful for a Healthcare Agency to hold applicants' details, even applicants after waiting more than 10 weeks the compliance process withdraw the application.
These types of agencies earn their wages ,just because others are going to work.
They also said, that is normal for applicants to have their time wasted for unpaid training during " compliance " process.
So...in ICO 's wisdom if you want to work, and apply for a 0 hours contract with an Agency ( as newly relocated in an area) , you must submit details via social media, wait more than 10 weeks, pay yourself for DBS, waste 14 hours from your time for " training".
Then, seeing that " recruiters" take such a long time , you withdraw application because you found a much better job.
And ICO allows Agency to hold : Bank Statement for the last 9 months, passport, proofs of address and educational background, even you Do Not work for that agency.
I was Naive to believe ICO is professional.
They are far away from this.
And based on the reviews about " quality" of their work, it looks they are some kind of national embarrassment.

Yep. Pretty much agree with everything here. They are infuriatingly pointless. Absolute waste of oxygen. Will take up with my mp after the general election.

They don’t investigate complaints anymore thanks to the recent court ruling.

I made a data protection complaint
IC-287024-W9K2.
Clearly bullet pointing my complaints with evidence of concerns.

Only for the ICO to do nothing except request a sars which I had already done twice. Then closed the case.

What’s the point of this service if it no longer has to investigate complaints under law.

I would be lucky to be able to list every failing this drain on Taxpayers money has.

In the last few months I have raised a complaint, and it more or less states on submission, thanks for raising a complaint but we will not take any action other than chat nicely to the party you are complaining about.

On enquiry I am told no action will be taken unless it is a "big" issue and that the ICO has no statutory powers to issue or enforce fines, as these would be challenged in the court and struck down.

They therefore have to rely on the goodwill of the people being investigated to accept a fine.

Try complaining online doesn't work. If you are unlucky enough to get to raise a case you are asked for information you cannot possibly have and they take several months to even acknowledge the issue being raised.

So to get this I raised a SAR with the organization I am complaining about who then failed to meet the deadline or the content or share in a way I could access.

Back to ICO well that's fine they can do that. I questioned whether in fact the choice of delivery was not to the benefit of the data subject; to which the roundabout answer was not exactly you have to state you cannot access it and suggest an alternate which the processor/ controller has to agree is secure.

But isn't the data the property of the subject? Hah maybe in the EU pal!

Ok so when a company registered and trading in the UK breached UK data laws but says that their responsibility to a data offices overseas ?

We would not get involved you need to address your complaint to the overseas data protection referred to by the organization making the alleged breach.

Back to the ICO to ask what action if any had been taken during this time, none wheat received the information you could not possibly get so we haven't done anything further.
Ok so why have you dropped the second organization in the complaint, oh they said that they had answered you and that they were happy that they had complied. (paraphrasing)

Honestly they are up there with BT as organizations that should just be ceased

NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE
What is the point of this s completely useless organisation.
I have written to my MP to ask this question.
Even my GDPR Solicitor what deals with them daily called them useless and told me not you take anything they say or do as fact.

THEY ARE TAX PAYER FUNDED AND DO NOT EVEN BOTHER TO RESPOND TO TAX PAYERS ON HERE,
USELESS COMPLAIN to Your MP and link this page

This is a toothless tiger. I would only recommend going through their processes so you can say to a solicitor you have ticked that useless box. It is a fop of an organisation with very little to offer any members of the public. Their track record on human rights and rights of the child is woefully inadequate. It is not fit for purpose yet public money is being spent to support something that is simply broken.

Do you even exist? Not heard anything. Thought you were supposed to help things move along.

I had provided clear cut evidence an organisation held data on me from a third party. This organisation had lied and claimed they didn't. My case worker, Helen Scullion, asked the organisation if they had any. Unsurprisingly the organisation lied again, and despite a dated email supplied between them and another third party through a freedom of information request of that third party - referring to me, Helen - despite being provided with this evidence, decided this wasn't grounds to pursue further action, in direct contradiction of their policy stating "Where we have significant concerns about an organisation's ability to comply with the law, we can take regulatory action.", How blatantly lying about not possessing data, did not constitute "significant concerns about an organisations ability to comply with the law" is beyond me.

It also took two emails and a phone call for Helen to even bother explaining her botched reasoning, this after waiting nearly three months, and submitting pages worth of evidence for the ICO resulting in the ICO emailing the organisation, asking a question I'd already asked, and giving me a response I'd already been given.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Update, several months later I was fortunately able to win a court case against my employer due to the hardwork of a generous no-win/no-fee lawyer.

Had I not had this luck, my old employer would have financially crippled me. The ICO could easily identify wrong-doing and chose to sit by and let it happen. It's not just the fact they do nothing, it's that they waste so much of your time and energy before doing so.

Human beings have a great capacity for wrongdoing. It’s an attribute that is unique in the world of life. We can and do make things worse, voluntarily, with full knowledge of what we are doing (as well as accidentally, and carelessly, and in a manner that is wilfully blind). – Jordan B. Peterson 2018

A UK Government agency that has been created to make people believe there are regulations for businesses to comply with.

The reality is that large companies know this to be a toothless wonder and is the reason getting a Data Subject Access Request is something businesses take little to no attention of.

The legal Director of Experian, has deliberately ignored my rights to access the data they hold about myself, especially the FALSE data that was supplied via ScottishPower along with any communications regarding to dealing with this matter! Experian’s Legal Department have continually shown a complete disregard for any of the rules & regulations set out by industry regulated framework along with UK Law & Legislation in particular the criminal offence committed under The Theft Act 1968 Section 17 False Accounting. This is compounded by the fact the criminal offence has been committed against The Executor of the Estate that holds a Grant Of Probate as issued by The High Court.

Ico are aiding police forces and buisness to cover up data to protect them.they are against the general public and designed to collect your evidence,then they aid the organisation in a cover up.deliberately created after Birmingham 6 fiasco and corruption.

ALways demanding money off me for my CCTV system but never does anything to stop all the spam calls, texts and emails. Online portal is impossible to use, keeps rejecting the complaint forms and even the complaint form for an issue with the ICO will not send.

I wanted to complain about HP policy of forcing users to access the printers they have bought only via HP cloud services thereby gathering unnecessary user data and exposure to security risks. But you have to jump through so many hoops you just give up. It's obvious the public should be protected from this harvesting but the ico offers no resistance to global companies.

Heidi Moore, "Lead" case officer, has not upheld my complaint regarding non-conformity regarding a subject access request to my GP SURGERY. As a highly experienced former police detective I submitted a wealth of corroborative documentary evidence as proof of such.
I wonder what training or experience Ms. Moore has? Fair does, only took 3 months to receive a reply. Absolute joke organisation.