Breach of the Data Protection Act

CA Purkis made this Freedom of Information request to Home Office

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

The request was refused by Home Office.

Dear Home Office,

Could I please have any information as to how many complaints, legal actions, or other complaints specifically received concerning breaches of the Data Protection Act by The Home Office, or any of the departments within it?

These to cover complaints etc from individuals, legal
representatives, or other bodies. The breaches to include matters
of any nature that are covered by the Data Protection Act.

Yours faithfully,

CA Purkis

FOI Requests, Home Office

Thank you for contacting the FOI Requests mailbox.

Your message has been logged and will be dealt with shortly.

We aim to provide a response to all FOI requests within 20 working days.

If your message is with regard to an existing FOI case or is a general
query please ensure you have left any file references and contact details.


Thank you.


show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

FOI Requests, Home Office

1 Attachment

Dear CA Purkis,


Please see attached correspondence in response to your 2 recent Freedom of
Information requests concerning data breaches/losses (and complaints
about), in the department.


Yours sincerely


R Taylor

Information Access Team





show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Jt Oakley left an annotation ()

CA.. A word search the document it doesn't bring up and mention if security breaches.

In addition, the answer implies that Theresa May, as the responsible minister, doesn't care a fig about security breaches her department hasn't bothered to ask if there have been any.

If she had, the stats would be readily available.

CA Purkis left an annotation ()

Absolutely correct Jan, but look at the
ICO's response below

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on this load of rubbish!

Jt Oakley left an annotation ()

'.....If it had, then disclosure of this fact would be likely to give
rise to negative comment in the media and elsewhere..... '

So because the public might get to know about it via the media, it's necessary to collude and keep any incompetence secret?

Very 1984.

Do they think that other government departments will refuse to have anything to do with the ICO if it doesn't take part in covering up their mistakes? That they will flounce off and refuse to communicate with the ICO? ....Seems so...

What happened to the government's new transparency?

How can the government possibly improve matters if there is a straightforward collusion between all government departments to cover up mistakes?


The essence is that you are asking for stats, not for in-depth information and analysis on each case.

It's obviously ridiculous that the information can't be supplied on this minimal basis.

But there you go..when it comes to government, remember the key phrase:

'They are all in it together'.

CA Purkis left an annotation ()

It is beyond belief! These mammoth regulatory bodies cost the public a fortune to run and yet they seem mostly ineffectual! The UKBA completely ignored their request to provide me with information zi had been refused - no wonder as they top toe round the agencies they are meant to be regulating!