Home Page

8 April 2004

Mr Bob Stanley
Information Compliance Manager
113 Chancery Lane
London WC2A 1PL

Your Ref. sa/bs/251

Dear Sir

Re; Application for information

Thank you for your letter dated 1 April '04.

First let me say that under the rules of the Law Society's Data Protection Notice the information I am seeking should have been sent to me at the times third parties requested information on me. This was a failure by the 'Data Controller'. As I am now seeking the information for the periods mentioned I fail to see why any court ruling would have any effect on the failure of a Data Controller to carry out his duties in a correct and legal fashion, if so, you would need to explain it to me.

The information I am seeking in the first instance concerns information that was passed to Thos Boyd Whyte Solicitors on the 7/8 June 2000 by the OSS/Data Controller as Doc.1, a memorandum written by my Solicitor at the time, Tula Fitzpatrick, clearly shows information was collected by her which was before my complaints file became live also this information was used for unrelated purposes to my complaint. According to Lord Falconer the Data Controller "…has to make sure that all the data processed always complies with an enforceable set of good information handling rules known as the eight data protection principles (The term "processing" covers the obtaining, holding, use and disclosure of data)".
1. 'We will not use that information for any unconnected purpose without your consent'; from a complainant's file that is not 'live' or "unconnected" information is collected you require the consent of the Complainant. As you did not have mine please supply documentation as to who sanctioned it (i.e. Court Order, Chief Executive etc?)
2. 'All requests for information in accordance with the Code shall be in writing…'; please supply this written request from Thos Boyd Whyte that should state the 'purpose' for the use of the information that is required.
3. 'A request for information shall be acknowledged by or on behalf of the Chief Executive…'; I would like a copy of the 'acknowledgement' which as the information 'requested' was unrelated to my complaint as well as my file not yet being 'live', should show a refusal of the request.
4. As I am supposed to be informed when data is being 'collected' from my file please supply all relevant information that supposedly informed me of such activities. If you look at Doc.1/4 you will see I was told the OSS would be contacting me.
Secondly, Doc.2 shows data was collected by the OSS/Data Controller again during a period that my file was still not 'live' from, I assume, either Mr A Higgins QC or my solicitors at the time, Panesar & Co, if so this was possibly a breach of Confidentially. If however this information was solicited by the OSS/Data Controller then not only was there a 'breach of confidentiality' by a third party but there was possibly a violation of the Data Protection Notice in as much as data 'unrelated' to my complaint was collected and used.
1. Possibly by the letter itself you could say I was informed that data had come into the possession of the OSS/Data Controller.
2. I would like copies of the request(s) for data that were sent or received that show how this information was acquired, from whom it was acquired and this would include any memorandums and/or telephone attendance notes.
I believe the data I am requesting concerns me, is about me and I have a right to this information. If I find any of the data is untrue, inaccurate or illegally acquired, at the very least I have a right to have it deleted.

Thirdly, concerning Richard Hegarty you state "I do not understand the point…". Simple, if you read Doc.3 a letter I wrote to Richard Hegarty, highlighted in yellow, you will see he has collected information on me from, I assume, the OSS/Data Controller which is long after my complaints file was serviced and closed. It would appear the OSS/Data Controller has given out data that was 'unrelated' to my complaint to person(s) who were also 'unrelated' to my complaint from a file that was closed.

1. To access data from a complainant's file the Complainant's 'consent' is required; as you did not have mine please supply documentation as to who sanctioned it (i.e. Court Order, Chief Executive etc?)
2. I would like a copy of Richard Hegarty's written request, which is inline with the correct procedures that should state his 'purpose' for the use of the data he was requesting.
3. A copy of the Chief Executive's reply as required by the rules.
4. As I am supposed to be informed when data is being 'collected' from my file I would like to be shown what attempts were made to inform me, if not, please tell me why?
5. I believe the data passed to Richard Hegarty was illegally given and it should have been refused, please give me the reason(s) he was allowed access to my personal data?
If you look at the second part of Doc.3, highlighted in green, you will see I gave Richard Hegarty the opportunity to explain but he failed to reply. If however you state this data did not come from the OSS/Data Controller I will pass your letter onto the Independent Solicitors investigating my complaint against Richard Hegarty and ask that they investigate the source also how he obtained this information.

Finally and unless you can supply the data I am asking for it would appear the information that was 'freely' given was done over the telephone to people who the OSS/Data Controller only 'assumed' they were who they said they were which means data that related to me was passed to an 'unsecured' source which amounts to a total violation of "…all the data processed always complies with an enforceable set of good information handling rules…". In my case what do you do? You enforce the rules by asking for proof of ID, inform me there is in effect a 40 working day period before I can expect a reply (to people you assumed were solicitors you did this 'instantly' on the 'phone, Doc.1). You charge an OAP £10 for information that should have been given at the time but you violated the rules by failing to inform me that data was being collected, the purpose and who was collecting it all without my permission yet you gave this data to people you could only 'assume' were who they said they were free of charge. You are now telling me the data you illegally gave to an 'unsecured' source and about which you failed to inform me at the time, you now say "…the documents to which you refer would be outside the Data Protection Act and not caught by a subject access request".

Lord Falconer talks a lot about 'transparency in the legal system' I would say his 'transparency' is comparable to those distant 'London Smogs'.

If there is anything you don't 'understand' just ask.

Yours sincerely

X X Xxxx