Been away for a few days so apologise for late contribution.

A murderer, who murdered his ex-girlfriend, was found to have in his
possession written notes on the ex-girlfriends new boyfriends car registered
number, name and address.

Enquiries revealed he had possibly obtained it from a police officer.  The
police officer was convicted at the magistrates court for computer misuse
act offence, but cleared on appeal to the crown court.  (Puzzling why charge
was computer misuse rather than data protection.)

IanW

----- Original Message -----
From: <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 10:56 AM
Subject: Bunch of Tales


> Thanks to everyone who responded to my request for cautionary tales.  I
have
> collated the replies below (some of which you will have seen already) in
> response to several requests and hope they will be of interest / amusement
> or just make some of you feel smug!
>
> Jackie Leesons
> Data Protection Co-ordinator
> Peterborough City Council
> Tel:  01733 452295
> e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
>
> I came from the police arena and I have a "horror" story the first
involves
> a police officer checking the PNC (police National Computer) for the
> registration of a vehicle, because the lady he was chatting up in a club
> drove off in it and he wanted to contact her.  She complained about misuse
> of his power to track her, (she obviously was not as impressed by him as
he
> with her!), the officer was disciplined and was reduced in rank!!
>
> ****
>
> I know of a very recent case where a large utility was opening up  a call
> centre, the trainees were given the live system to practice on,   and
given
> free reign to look up accounts of anyone they knew. So much for  data
> protection!
>
> ****
>
> A friend of mine works for a company that has a telephone answering system
> which identifies the caller and brings up their details on a pc in front
of
> the telephone operator to help them answer the caller's enquiry. The
system
> is also capable of displaying an automatic "warning screen" on the pc if
> there is anything significant about the account.
> After one long and tiresome session with a particular caller, an operator
> decided to create a "pop up" warning that said "Be very cautious in your
> approach to this customer".
> The operator was not wholly familiar with the computer system, and,
> unfortunately, rather than create a warning notice screen, the address
> screen of the caller was actually changed.
> The matter was drawn to my friend's attention by the (even more irate)
> caller who was astonished to find the offending text inserted between
their
> name and address when the next bill was delivered..................
>
>
> ****
>
>
> Only the variant of the one you describe, which I think I circulated as a
> "cautionary tale" last year.
> Policeman called us with information about an alleged assault on one of
our
> students and asked for home address. Gave us the phone number of his
police
> station in Devon so that we could call back to verify his credentials. We
> called back and a person in a Devon accent put us through the switchboard
to
> their personnel office who verified the identity, ID number etc of the
> caller. So we passed on the information.  Turned out that this phone
number
> was a callbox on the moors somewhere, and the all the parts were played by
> the original caller - himself, switchboard, personnel officer, clicks on
the
> line during transfer etc.  We only discovered this after the student
> complained about unsolicited calls from a harasser.
> Moral: check directory enquiries (or your local police) to verify the
phone
> number of the police station too!
>
> ****
>
>
> A real incident occurred here early last year that incurred the wrath of
the
> Registrar/Commissioner.
> One Department holds regular sickness monitoring meeting.  At these
> meetings, various reports and sickness records are discussed, including
some
> personal sickness reports.  At one meeting, it was discovered that the
> statistical analysis was wrong, being based on incorrect data.  The
> Personnel Manager immediately agreed to re-circulate the right
information.
> She issues an instruction to one of her subordinates to send them out
> "urgently".  This was done but to save time, the whole data set was
> corrected and sent out - just with a compliments slip but without an
> envelope!
> A union rep spotted this. Rather than simply take up the matter directly
> with the Personnel Manager, he wrote to Wilmslow.  An official
investigation
> was called and the Department had no option but to plead guilty.
> Confidential and personal information should have been circulated in
sealed
> envelopes and marked for the attention of the addressee only.
> The Department was forced to review procedures and carry out some DP
> training
>
>
> ****
>
>
> One thing of a "good awareness" variety I noticed recently in a hospital
in
> New York was a sign in each elevator that said,"Staff are reminded that
> patient records are confidential and should not be discussed in public
> places, including the elevator."
> The opposite of that is the story told by the former Data Protection
> Commissioner of British Columbia, Canada, who visited a hospital and found
> patient records piled next to the registration office at the front door to
> the hospital where everyone entered the hospital and could easily pick up
> and read, or even walk off with, a record.
>
>
> ****
>
>
> A large, well-known firm of loss adjusters investigating an insurance
claim
> sent a form to a London borough informing them that they were under a
> statutory duty to tell the company whether the individual was paying
council
> tax and if they were resident at a particular address.
>
>
> ****
>
>
> Virgin Atlantic Airlines sent a letter to a passenger which began
"following
> the flight of you and your wife" - he was travelling with his secretary!
>
>
>
> ***Private and Confidential Notice***
>
> The information contained in this E-Mail is intended for the named
recipients only.
> It may contain privileged and confidential information and if you are not
the intended
> recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action or reliance on
it.
> If you have received this E-Mail in error, please notify the sender
immediately by
> using the E-Mail address or on +44 (0) 1733 452411.