22 replies to this topic

[recovery man]

Lancashire Constabulary has been fined £70,000 after papers with sensitive information about a 15-year-old girl were found on a street in Blackpool.

The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) said it was the first penalty it has served to a police force.

The ICO said the information was contained in a missing person's report which was discovered by a member of the public on 23 July last year.

The police force said it would "learn lessons from this unfortunate event".

The report had previously been used by an officer trying to locate the missing girl and is thought to have been left in a police vehicle for several days.

It is then believed the report fell out of the car, when it was used by a different officer.

It was handed in to a local newspaper.

'Extremely worrying' The ICO's investigation found that the constabulary did not record when sensitive personal information was taken outside the police station and that officers had no specific training on how to look after hard copy documents outside the station.

Steve Eckersley, head of enforcement at the ICO, said: "The fact that information as sensitive as this could go missing without anybody realising is extremely worrying.

"The loss of this information and the news that it had been leaked to a local newspaper is likely to have been extremely distressing for all involved.

"While we are pleased that Lancashire Constabulary has agreed to take action to make sure people's information is safe, it is vitally important that police forces have effective data protection policies in place."

Deputy Chief Constable Chris Weigh said: "The loss of any personal data, particularly sensitive information, is extremely serious and is rightly a cause for concern and we will learn lessons from this unfortunate event and do all we can to make sure that the risk of this happening again is as low as it can be.

"Both officers involved were embarrassed at the consequences of their actions and dismayed at the potential upset that might have been caused to the parties involved.

"The constabulary was quick to respond once the mistake had been identified and both officers received management action."

http://www.bbc.co.uk...ashire-17363814 this is a very unfortunate event to happen.

[IndiaTango]

'It was handed in to a local newspaper'

Really? I fully understand the seriousness of this incident, but why would you not take it to a Police Station?

[Rocket]

Surely the sensitive data would have been better protected if it had been handed into a police station rather than a local newspaper?

Edit: Pipped to the post there, glad I'm not the only one thinking this.

Edited by Rocket, 14 March 2012 - 03:23 PM.

[IndiaTango]

Surely the sensitive data would have been better protected if it had been handed into a police station rather than a local newspaper?

Edit: Pipped to the post there, glad I'm not the only one thinking this.

Obviously the MoP wasn't thinking this...

[pathca]

Sums up current mentality to me.(Sadly )

[recovery man]

Surely the sensitive data would have been better protected if it had been handed into a police station rather than a local newspaper?

i agree with you rocket why it was not handed in to a police station then given to a local rag? allso think the fine of £70,000 pounds fine is well out of order when It is then believed the report fell out of the car and it can happen to any one and now can be fined for it

Edited by recovery man, 14 March 2012 - 04:22 PM.

[hathaway]

it makes me so angry that every sensitive thing found gets handed to a newspaper.

edit: not really unnecessary: this issue makes me more angry than pretty much anything, and all it was was asterisks.. But oh well

Edited by hathaway, 14 March 2012 - 04:41 PM.
Unnecessary profanity removed

[spook2106]

I believe it may be done like that to cause maximum embarrassment to whoever lost the information.

[Rocket]

I believe it may be done like that to cause maximum embarrassment to whoever lost the information.

Possibility of financial gain more like.

[MikeBrum]

i agree with you rocket why it was not handed in to a police station then given to a local rag? allso think the fine of £70,000 pounds fine is well out of order when It is then believed the report fell out of the car and it can happen to any one and now can be fined for it

I won't be popular for saying this but; the difference is it's a GPMS document, with personal information on it (Covered under the Data Protection Act) and a police service lost it, regardless of how it was lost they need to be more careful with it, that's in the law!

HOWEVER, I think it's truly deplorable that it was handed into a local rag and not the police, and they should now be done under the DPA...

[Giraffe]

I won't be popular for saying this but; the difference is it's a GPMS document, with personal information on it (Covered under the Data Protection Act) and a police service lost it, regardless of how it was lost they need to be more careful with it, that's in the law!

HOWEVER, I think it's truly deplorable that it was handed into a local rag and not the police, and they should now be done under the DPA...

I agree with what you and others have said about the callousness behind whoever decided to hand it in to a local rag rather than the police station.

In terms of the fine - this is something I can't agree with. All it does is take vital money away from the front line. It doesn't serve as any actual punishment in the same way as it would if it were a private company being fined. Surely a better way of penalising the force would be to publicly give them a hand slapping and make them provide periodical updates to the ICO about what meaningful measures they have taken to prevent it from happening again.

[Jeebs]

It's abit wrong that someone would hand it to a local newspaper rather than to a police station. Surely there should be some from of criminal proceedings against the person that did that?

Edited by Jeebs, 14 March 2012 - 04:53 PM.

[bensonby]

The person that handed it to the newspaper should be charged with theft. Simple.

[CmdKeen]

To be honest I can see why the information is handed to the press, they are subject to the law and aren't going to print the name of the individual or any identifying information.

What it does guarantee though is publicity and the force changing policy. If it had been handed in at the station there is no guarantee of anything, it could quite easily just get securely disposed of, with possibly a message to the officer who "lost" it if they can be identified.

The point is that the data protection issue really happened once the document was left in the vehicle, not once it fell out. The data wasn't being properly managed from that moment on and the officer is at fault from that point.

The same thing happens all the time in the computer security world when disclosing vulnerabilities. Letting the company know often doesn't lead to the issues being fixed, and has indeed been known to result in intimidation and repercussions. Going to the press can provide anonymity if that is what you are after.

[recovery man]

In terms of the fine - this is something I can't agree with. All it does is take vital money away from the front line. It doesn't serve as any actual punishment in the same way as it would if it were a private company being fined. Surely a better way of penalising the force would be to publicly give them a hand slapping and make them provide periodical updates to the ICO about what meaningful measures they have taken to prevent it from happening again.

i am going with Girffe on this one and why take vital money away from the front line wrong in my opinion.+1

[MikeBrum]

I agree with what you and others have said about the callousness behind whoever decided to hand it in to a local rag rather than the police station.

In terms of the fine - this is something I can't agree with. All it does is take vital money away from the front line. It doesn't serve as any actual punishment in the same way as it would if it were a private company being fined. Surely a better way of penalising the force would be to publicly give them a hand slapping and make them provide periodical updates to the ICO about what meaningful measures they have taken to prevent it from happening again.

I agree completely, the fine was ridiculous - the person who lost it should have received a stern telling off and that be the end of it, it's truly disgusting that they can impose it!

[Jeebs]

I'm sure there's a specific offence relating to the unlawful posession of secret/restricted documents the person who headed them to the newspaper could be charged with, rather than just theft by finding?

[hathaway]

What it does guarantee though is publicity and the force changing policy.

It fell out of a car - how could policy possibly be changed to prevent that, a "headcount" of every sensitive document you have on your person (leave the station with 40 pages, come back to the station and make sure you count 40 pages)? The only thing that wasn't followed was common sense, and sadly that can't be taught.

[Onlyme2008]

I agree with the fine, to many times not only police, lose sensitive information, on the street, left on trains buses etc, and we just wait till it happens again.

This is some bodies personal details, and should be better cared for.

[Law_Grad]

Reading the comments in this thread it hardly encourages a person to hand a lost document back to the police. What with the wriggling and desire to see the finder prosecuted, it creates a doubt as to whether handing the document back to the police would result in any remedial action or not – in fact, it lends itself towards comments like whistle blowing about the third party media involvement.


And the way the winds blowing in this thread, then I wouldn’t trust the police to acknowledge their error and breach of data protection – just read the comments, where its everyone else to blame and can we also “stick them on” for the police negligence / lackadaisical actions.

[CmdKeen]

It fell out of a car - how could policy possibly be changed to prevent that, a "headcount" of every sensitive document you have on your person (leave the station with 40 pages, come back to the station and make sure you count 40 pages)? The only thing that wasn't followed was common sense, and sadly that can't be taught.

There are plenty of checks you're supposed to carry out on a car at the end of a shift anyway...

Checking a vehicle you leave for documents that shouldn't be there isn't hard and doesn't take long. Use a stapler if you've printed a massive report - do you need to print all that information? Did the officer utilise a binder / folder as many do or was it carried loose? You've plenty of pockets / pouches on your person to use as well, with zips.

Mistakes happen and the culture should be one of trying to prevent future ones. "This couldn't be prevented" is not the correct thing to say - and sometimes the only way an outside agency can shock any kind of change is by imposing a penalty.

[hathaway]

There are plenty of checks you're supposed to carry out on a car at the end of a shift anyway...

Exactly. If there are these checks, what policy change could prevent that? There are already checks, what more could be done?

[CmdKeen]

Exactly. If there are these checks, what policy change could prevent that? There are already checks, what more could be done?

Give the force a reason to ensure checks are carried out...

Otherwise every time there is a police service cockup they shouldn't be punished because there is already a procedure in place to avoid such things!