(no subject)

[damerell]

Dear organisations collecting money from me,

Which of these serves better as a "security check" - the first line of my address (that anyone with a phone book can discover), the customer/membership number printed only on your correspondence to me, or the amount that I owe you, printed only on one specific piece of correspondence? Which serves worst?

Why would I care if you didn't carry out this (bogus) check and allowed someone else to pay money towards my bill, provided that you don't disclose the amount of said bill? Please. Let them do it.

Why are you fobbing me off with nonsense about the Data Protection Act? There isn't a data protection issue here unless the mystery caller (who knows my customer number) asks you to disclose some facts about me.

No love,

David.

Comments

[kludge]

The data protection laws now appear to be a bullshit cover-all for any kind of "we haven't thought this through / can't be bothered to change this" nonsense. Financial records too - I bought our oven from John Lewis, and ended up with my CC details stored on their site. I emailed them asking them not to retain them and to delete my account. Result: "Unfortunately I am unable to delete your online account, by law any online orders you have made will be recorded on our systems." Queries about what law just got ignored.

(If you're wondering why I got to his stage, it's more bull plus some deceptive descriptions: Their website had a "make an account if you wish to receive shipping updates on your purchase" option, which I clicked thinking that I could always delete my account later. In fact, they don't need that account at all to send you shipping updates, but you don't learn that until after the account is made and your cc details are stored against it).

[damerell]

I think (if you care) you might return fire on their own terms. That is clearly a DPA violation.