Times article

[Clive George]

"Kenneth MacKenzie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Rob Morley <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> From what I've seen Clarkson doesn't actually incite others to do the
>> things that he claims he will do.
>
> It appears that his latest brilliant idea was to publish his bank
> account numbers in the Sun in order to prove that the recent concerns
> about missing personal data in were a "palaver about nothing". As a
> result of this one of his readers had now has set up a monthly 500
> pound direct debit from Mr Clarkson's account to a diabetes charity.
> He says "The bank cannot find out who did this because of the Data
> Protection Act and they cannot stop it from happening again."
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7174760.stm

That last sentence is wrong. Whether it's Clarkson being wrong or his bank
is a different question.

cheers,
clive

 

[Kenneth MacKenzie]

"Clive George" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Kenneth MacKenzie" wrote

>> He says "The bank cannot find out who did this because of the Data
>> Protection Act and they cannot stop it from happening again."
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7174760.stm
>
> That last sentence is wrong. Whether it's Clarkson being wrong or his
> bank is a different question.
>

Yes, it did seem rather unlikely. Still, if he believes it then that's
what counts.

 

[marc]

Kenneth MacKenzie wrote:
> "Clive George" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> "Kenneth MacKenzie" wrote
>
>>> He says "The bank cannot find out who did this because of the Data
>>> Protection Act and they cannot stop it from happening again."
>>>
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7174760.stm
>> That last sentence is wrong. Whether it's Clarkson being wrong or his
>> bank is a different question.
>>
>
> Yes, it did seem rather unlikely. Still, if he believes it then that's
> what counts.
>


IME organisations will hide behind the DPA whenever they feel the need
to try and bluster

 

[Ekul Namsob]

Kenneth MacKenzie <[email protected]> wrote:

> It appears that his latest brilliant idea was to publish his bank
> account numbers in the Sun in order to prove that the recent concerns
> about missing personal data in were a "palaver about nothing". As a
> result of this one of his readers had now has set up a monthly 500
> pound direct debit from Mr Clarkson's account to a diabetes charity.
> He says "The bank cannot find out who did this because of the Data
> Protection Act and they cannot stop it from happening again."
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7174760.stm

Have you ever written a cheque?

Luke


--
Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in
exile in Lancashire <http://www.shrimper.org.uk>

 

[Ian Smith]

On Mon, 07 Jan 2008, marc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> IME organisations will hide behind the DPA whenever they feel the
> need to try and bluster

Indeed. I generally have it to hand, but reading it out, emailing or
faxing it toi them has never yet helped.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

 

[marc]

Ian Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Jan 2008, marc <[email protected]> wrote:
>> IME organisations will hide behind the DPA whenever they feel the
>> need to try and bluster
>
> Indeed. I generally have it to hand, but reading it out, emailing or
> faxing it toi them has never yet helped.
>
> regards, Ian SMith


I find that asking "which of the six sections of the DPA do you think
covers what you have just said?" normally gets them mumbling and then
admitting that it's their own internal policy that they are hiding behind.

 

[Rob Morley]

In article <[email protected]>, Kenneth MacKenzie
[email protected] says...
> Rob Morley <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > From what I've seen Clarkson doesn't actually incite others to do the
> > things that he claims he will do.
>
> It appears that his latest brilliant idea was to publish his bank
> account numbers in the Sun in order to prove that the recent concerns
> about missing personal data in were a "palaver about nothing". As a
> result of this one of his readers had now has set up a monthly 500
> pound direct debit from Mr Clarkson's account to a diabetes charity.
> He says "The bank cannot find out who did this because of the Data
> Protection Act and they cannot stop it from happening again."
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7174760.stm
>
It happens - I had a DD set up on my account despite the paperwork
clearly being for a different account and the signature bearing no
resemblance to mine. The Direct Debit Guarantee covers against loss in
the case of error or fraud, so only the payee loses out. Clarkson was
perhaps unwise to publish his details to quite so many people, in the
form of a challenge, but that's the way the system works and I doubt the
banks or organisatins that receive DD payments are in any hurry to
change it.

 

[Alan Braggins]

In article <[email protected]>, marc wrote:
>Ian Smith wrote:
>> On Mon, 07 Jan 2008, marc <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> IME organisations will hide behind the DPA whenever they feel the
>>> need to try and bluster
>>
>> Indeed. I generally have it to hand, but reading it out, emailing or
>> faxing it toi them has never yet helped.
>
>I find that asking "which of the six sections of the DPA do you think
>covers what you have just said?" normally gets them mumbling and then
>admitting that it's their own internal policy that they are hiding behind.

It's _remotely_ possible that the DPA could be relevent here. Obviously
there's nothing the bank can do internally to find out to set up the
direct debit, since all the information they were given says it was
Jeremy Clarkson. If they ask Diabetes UK "do you log the IP address of
everyone filling in your form?", then "no, we considered it, but decided
the DPA made it more hassle than it was worth" might be a truthful answer
whether they were actually right about the DPA or not.

But if the BBC correctly quotes Clarkson, and if Clarkson correctly quotes
the bank, it sounds like the bank is bullshitting because they can't be
bothered to explain properly.

An actual crook who wanted to get hold of the money themselves would be
a different situation.