In a message dated 16/11/2000 14:23:41 GMT Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
<< A colleague of mine had ordered some goods from a company - his order was
taking longer than he had anticipated. He phoned the company up today -
they asked him his postcode which he related to them. Anyway, the company
said "Are you Mr X" to which he said no and relayed his own name. The
person the company named was in fact my colleague's next door neighbour who
in fact had recently died so I suppose you could say that it is not a breach
of the DP Act as it only relates to living individuals. Surely this should
be tightened up as a postcode covers 6 addresses and you can find out
people's private business. The company should really have asked him his
surname...In this instance it was not about a living individual but this
sort of thing must happen all the time.
Anyone else got any similar stories? >>
--------------------------
The best one I read about (and carrying on from the DNA and Fingerprint
discussions this is an eye opener) was the two men with the same name, same
date of birth, same address and same postcode, even though they were
definitely two different people.
It turned out the builder or council had made a mistake when they built a new
row of houses that backed onto an existing terrace by using the same street
name - the post office also made a mistake in allocating the same post
codes. The name and date of birth? Just coincidence, of course.
Yet here we are relying on similar sets of data to ensure correct
identification!!
Ian B
MD
Keep IT Legal Ltd
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|