Information Commissioner's Office
We are often warned about keeping our personal information safe but what happens when that information is misused or lost by a police force?
For those that have been following my case there have been a catalogue of concerns where personal information relating to my wife and I including relevant documents needed for court cases have simply vanished.
Mr Gary Self of Pump Court Chambers has been representing Hampshire Constabulary in my cases for many years. He seeks to persuade the employment tribunal that the force is incompetent rather than corrupt.
Whilst there will always be an element of laziness and incompetence, these incidents concern information and property collected by the Professional Standards Department (PSD), supposedly cream of the crop officers who investigate other police officers.
To give a brief indication of the level of corruption by this department, information downloaded from my laptop has gone missing despite being held in the High Tech Crime Unit for Hampshire police, policy books and surveillance evidence amongst other relevant evidence.
In my case the Police and Crime Commissioner's Office for Hampshire have been working hand in glove with Hampshire police to cover up serious matters that I had disclosed and can be found in other areas of my site.
I have found and following various other cases on social media that our rgbulatory bodies do not appear to be doing their jobs and we have to ask why?
I will do a separate post on the IOPC however; is this down to a lack of experience of investigators or are they taking the easy option by simply accepting what they are being told by the police.
I have had to submit an appeal recently and I have raised a further concern with the ICO regarding Hampshire Constabulary failing to supply my personal information having identified that the force had previously lied regarding not having specific information in their possession.
What I didn't realise and can be seen from the e mail exchange below is that the ICO make decisions based on their conversation with the force and any documents supplied but do not give any opportunity for the complainant to have a right of reply or perhaps identify where the force may have been less than truthful with them.
Dear Lauren, You may be aware that I have been very unsatisfied by the ICO previously, it is nothing personal but there does seem to be a lack of investigation and an eagerness to simply accept what the police say which is a mistake. I note that you have stated in your e mail that my concern is
You have written to us concerned that the Police have not provided you with all the information to which you are entitled to as part of your Subject Access Requests (SARs). You have made multiple requests for your personal data, however, the Police have informed you that they would not be responding to your requests as they believe to do so would be manifestly excessive.
This is not a complete summary of my concerns.
The previous ICO caseworker dealing with my concern waited 3 months before contacting the PCCs office and simply accepted what the PCCs office said without referring back to me.
I do not want this happening again and would be grateful if you would revert to me before making any decisions which would be the fair thing to do.
The proforma for submitting a concern on line is not great and I had asked the previous caseworker Mr Turner to wait until I had submitted further information and a chronology to assist.
I will provide a more detailed report so that you can be clear as to what my concerns.
As this is a matter of public interest and originally related to my being a whistle blower which may be apparent from the papers, I will publish my dealings with the ICO in a post on my site www.goodcopdown.uk Yours sincerely Julian King
Dear Mr King,
Thank you for your email of 9 July 2019.
In your email you have stated that you wish to provide further information and a chronology to assist the ICO in its consideration of your concern. If you wish to provide this, please email your supporting documentation to our email@example.com email address with the above case reference in this format [Ref. RFA0830112] in the subject line.
Please note, we will provide an outcome on whether we believe Hampshire Police have complied with their data protection obligations and we will base this decision on all of the information we have been provided. At this time, we do not consider it necessary to contact yourself or the Police after a response has been provided by the Police, prior to making our outcome.
Should you wish to discuss this case any further, or require any clarification, please do not hesitate to contact me.
If you are responding via email, you can forward your response to our firstname.lastname@example.org email address with the above case reference in this format [Ref. RFA0830112] in the subject line.
Lauren Nixon Case Officer Information Commissioner’s Office Direct dial number: 0330 313 1774
So, let's see what happens next and I will keep those interested updated.