Home > ACS LAW Letters, Uncategorized > Another Pathetic acquiescence of the ICO towards ACS LAW

Another Pathetic acquiescence of the ICO towards ACS LAW

There are few positive words  if any I could use to describe the Information Commissioners Office (ICO).  There are far better negative ones.  “As much use as a chocolate teapot”, “Like an ashtray on a motorcycle”.

Indeed the ICO are SO inept it would be hard to imagine them being able to “Hit any water if the fell out of a boat”.

What has stirred my ire against the ICO? Is it the fact that they spent EIGHT MONTHS investigating one of the BIGGEST DATA leaks in English History? or the fact that they concluded with a £1000 fine that if the perpetrator was good enough to pay quickly he could get a discount of 20%?  Was it the sheer arrogance of the ICO when phoning them up to report a company NOT registered with them that they suggested that their register was “Voluntary” and that they “Did not chase people” who “Had not registered” with them?

NO This is what has angered me.

Can you believe it, after countless people told the ICO that ACS LAW were NOT registered as a Data Handler, when it came to their renewal the ICO wrote THREE TIMES only for Andrew Crossley to ignore them, then only seemed to notice that they should send a “Final” warning as it then occurred to the ICO that they were “..dealing with the security incident you have just experienced”.  How much is it to renew your registration? £35

ACS LAW and Andrew Crossley acted with shocking disregard to the General public and their personal details, but WHO allowed them to get away with it for so long?  Do you REALLY feel your information is secure with such an inept body as the ICO guarding it?

For the timeline and how the ICO messed up their investigation into ACS LAW see here.

  1. Anonymous
    June 14, 2011 at 6:50 pm

    Total set of utter fuckpigs from the statrt!!!!!!!!!

  2. zoomboy
    June 14, 2011 at 10:25 pm

    But the ICO do have teeth! They just fined Surrey Council £120,000 for their breaches. But wait, theat’s a Gov’t body and that £120,000 comes from … erm, *US* the tax payer, so that’s OK then!

  3. Jack
    June 15, 2011 at 8:24 am

    I think this position of ICO was hurriedly created by the UK Government as part of a requirement from the EU (At Westminster they all love being told what to do by the EU no matter how much they deny it).
    As such I wonder if you have considered complaining to your Euro MP or to the EU directly that the UK Government are not fulfilling their EU data protection commitments and quote the ACS:Law data breach as evidence.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 298 other followers

%d bloggers like this: