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."
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.
In article <[email hidden]>, Kenneth MacKenzie [email hidden] says...
Quoted message said:
Rob Morley said:
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."
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.
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.