Examples from Annual Report

MBNA AND EIRCOM/Complaints against MBNA Bank and Eircom for direct marketing practices A number of people complained to the …

MBNA AND EIRCOM/Complaints against MBNA Bank and Eircom for direct marketing practices
A number of people complained to the commissioner over the receipt of unsolicited telephone calls to their homes from MNBA Bank.

The commissioner said his investigation into the matter threw up two distinct but related issues: first, MBNA's response to individuals' requests to opt out of direct marketing; and second, Eircom's practice of "teleappending", namely adding telephone directory details on to other large databases.

Regarding the former issue, the commissioner said MBNA acknowledged its procedures to ensure people could remove themselves from direct marketing databases had clearly failed in the case of one complainant.

"Having investigated the matter, MBNA concluded that the problem had arisen due to deficiencies in communication with its direct marketing associate, PMI. MBNA said that more stringent checking procedures had been put in place, and that direct marketing staff had been re-educated, with a view to addressing these deficiencies."

READ MORE

As regards "teleappending", the Commissioner said this was a commercial service which Eircom offered clients such as MBNA, involving the automatic appending of telephone numbers in bulk on to other databases of names and addresses. The commissioner said he advised Eircom that, in the absence of the clear consent of subscribers, the practice was in breach of the Data Protection Act 1998. Following discussions, the company agreed to discontinue the practice "until the consent issues could be resolved".

CONCERN/Complaint against Concern over the disclosure of donor details

A number of donors to the charity Concern complained last November about the receipt of mailings from a financial institution, GE Capital, which appeared to be aware of their donations. It transpired Concern had agreed an "affinity arrangement" with a separate direct marketing company.

The company in question had issued special promotional mailings to donors saying that GE Capital would give an average of £150 to Concern for every loan taken out under the offer. The commissioner examined the "opt-out" boxes used by Concern on its donor subscriber form. They asked "(a) if a person wanted to receive any further marketing, or (b) if the person consented to data being shared with 'like-minded organisations'."

Having considered the nature of the arrangement, Mr Meade said "I did not accept that a financial institution was a 'like-minded organisation' of the sort envisaged in the Concern donation form.

"Accordingly, the use of the Concern database to facilitate direct marketing by financial institutions was not, to my mind, compatible with the purpose for which Concern had obtained the data, and therefore this was not a legitimate use of these data."

He said Concern indicated the process was to cease immediately. He added: "There is no data protection objection to affinity relationships in principle, as long as such relationships are carried out in a proper and transparent manner, including appropriate clear and informed consent."

RYANAIR/Investigation of  Ryanair over disclosure of passenger data

The commissioner investigated comments on radio last August by Ryanair chief executive Mr Michael O'Leary suggesting that SIPTU president Mr Des Geraghty had used the non-union airline several times in 2001.

The commissioner said he did not receive any formal complaints but "was concerned that Ryanair's public reference to named passengers appeared to be incompatible with the requirements of data protection law".

In the course of a general criticism of SIPTU, Mr O'Leary had referred to a "D. Geraghty" who, he claimed, had flown with Ryanair six times in the previous six months. Mr Geraghty said later he had never travelled with the airline "before, during or since" the unsuccessful strike for union recognition by SIPTU baggage handlers in 1998.

Mr O'Leary responded by asking whether the hard-earned dues of union members were "being frittered away on higher fares for SIPTU bigwigs".

The commissioner said that following his approach to Ryanair, the airline assured him that it would not in future refer to any named passengers without their prior consent. "While I was prepared to accept these assurances in good faith, I consider it important to emphasise that any organisation holding personal data about its customers must treat these data as being confidential - and certainly must not allow private details to be broadcast over the national airwaves," he said. An unrelated complaint against Ryanair over the delayed application of a credit card charge was rejected by the commissioner.