Law Society's 'Data Protection Notice'
Does it have any teeth? See the bottom two paragraphs
No where in the 'Data Protection Notice' does it say solicitors, that there has been a complaint made against, have the right to 'telephone' or by using the correct procedures for 'requesting information' have the right to 'request' information from a Complainant's file for related purposes to that complaint (4/11/04 the Information Commissioner's office has stated "There is no such provision in the Data Protection Act") and regarding unconnected purposes the rule clearly states "We will not use that information for any unconnected purpose without your consent".
Regarding "We will have to reveal your information to the firm or solicitor you have complained about" If you then read "We will use the information you give us to investigate your complaint" this clearly means the information the CCS pass to the solicitors will only be information directly connected to the complaint and any unconnected information will not be given and we then come back to "We will not use that information for any unconnected purpose without your consent". I believe it is clear the CCS would only be allowed to 'reveal' information that is directly related to a complaint and to be only used in 'connection' with that complaint, nowhere does it state solicitors can 'request' information from a complainant's file to be used for "any unconnected purpose without your consent".
The information Tula Fitzpatrick, my Solicitor at Thos Boyd Whyte's, 'requested' and was 'revealed' by the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors (now the CCS) was used for unrelated purposes and was collected without my consent then passed to third parties by Thos Boyd Whyte's for their personal gain.King Richard own rule book states "If someone wants to use your information for another purpose you should be told about it and given a choice".
King Richard doesn't know the difference between the GPO and British Telecoms, what he has stated is this " would also appear to be in compliance with the Acts". Remember what King Richard's office said above "There is no such provision in the Data Protection Act" you have to wonder if these people have all their 'Marbles'.
I asked King Richard's advocate, Jonathan Gray, for a copy of these new Law Society rules (Click Here) but he does not appear to have them, may be King Richard is still writing them. I also asked Bob Stanley the Information Compliance Manager for a copy of these rules (Click Here) obviously King Richard has not sent them to him yet.
However having said what I have printed above it would appear, according to 'King Richard' a violation of the Data Protection Acts is not a criminal act and the most 'King Richard' could do is ask the person/body responsible for the violation not to do it again (see his letter highlighted in blue). What does this tell us? Well that's easy, what the Law Society tell you in their Data Protection Notice (see top paragraph) is nothing more than a load of 'Crap' and anything that you tell the CCS and even your solicitors can be used in any way they like. Remember if Dickie the Chair (Richard Hegarty, Chair of the Compliance Board (rules enforcer)) misuses data then clearly you cannot trust anyone connected with the Judiciary. It's no good complaining to Zahida Manzoor, the Legal Services Ombudsman, as my referral to her concerning the misuse of information supplied by me to the CCS got me nowhere.
Would somebody out there tell me what the hell is the Law Society's 'Data Protection Notice', the 'Data Protection Acts' and 'King Richard' are all about?