My fellow Wirral whistleblower Nigel Hobro has been in touch with what could one day amount to a ground-breaking proposal.
Please read on:
Salve Paul,In 2014 I had occasion to be referred to Ingeus on the Work scheme program. Basically I attended on interview but found work and I was for two years plagued by Ingeus for contact.It struck me that the urgency of their phone calls, their attendance at my house TWICE might indicate, rather like Wirralbiz, that they be tempted to cheat a la A4e.I asked DWP for the personal details of any claims made by Ingeus on my account-since they only had one initial interview. I will receive the data on 19th April as per the mailed letter to me from DWP.It struck me that these ridiculous schemes “Back to work” etc would be stopped in their tracks by each individual unwillingly subjected to them requesting their personal data.DWP would think twice about contracting such organisations, and the same be deterred from fraud, should each person request the data by FOI.*A kind of Gandhi-like revoltVale
*Nigel placed his request on 7th March 2017 via the whatdotheyknow.com website. Staff at WDTK correctly concealed it from public view as it contained personal information, and were kind enough to relay it onwards to the DWP as a ‘personal data’ submission.
So rather than be placed at the mercy of the DWP, Nigel set about taking a measure of control back – and gaining some leeway for himself.
He’d lodged what is known as a Data Protection Act “Subject Access Request” – albeit via an FOI channel – which is now with data professionals at Ingeus – all in accordance with the DPA 1998 – in order to gain access to the personal data and information that they hold on him.
It looks like he came in for special attention – with more than one home visit.
In other words, this was costly attention, probably motivated by a financial incentive into the groaning Ingeus coffers when the time arrived.
That’s how these things are arranged sadly. It’s referred to in classic literature as “getting one’s pound of flesh”.
And data controllers, i.e. the public and private bodies subject to this law have a clear statutory obligation to respond and provide your personal data within 40 days.
There is no getting out of this and nowhere for them to hide, unless you threaten the reputation of an employer council, like we once did. But that’s rare. In normal circumstances they have to cough up.
Imagine if one day, a powerful movement was created whereby just 25% of targeted and oppressed unemployed citizens turned the tables on their oppressors and bound them up in the minutiae of responding in detail to a Subject Access Request every single time, all justified, not vexatious, done for serious purpose – and for correct and noble reasons and fully in keeping with their statutory rights and the law of the land?
Yes thanks – I will be watching & waiting until the 18 April 2017
Please keep up your marvellous work of “Speaking Truth Unto Power”
And to you – Wirral Council –
” Beware – The Axeman Cometh – But FOR YOU
Too often hired auditors are timidly reporting “No evidence found to back up allegations of fraud” which is as comforting as the accountant’s classic
“we have prepared these accounts without audit according to the information and explanations given us”
Which can be to say the same as whatever indications of malfeasance came to our notice we could safely ignore the pointers as no confession was received from management who pay us
“No evidence of fraud *looked for* in the first place because our remit was designed to avoid it.”
“Where two or more requests are received for related information from the same person, or from a group of people acting as part of a campaign, the requests can be aggregated for the purpose of considering whether the cost limit applies.”
They would definitely try this
Are you referring to FOI requests or DPA subject access requests – as in personal data? I suspect it may be the former, in which case it doesn’t apply here. Thanks.
Pingback: Newshound’s Newsround 24/3/17 | newshoundsnewsround