Dawlish Discussion

Devon County County council BBC red button page 1670, £90.000 fine from INFORMATION COMMISSIONER

this what you're referring to?

http://www.information-age.com/channels/security-and-continuity/news/2137473/ico-slams-local-government-data-protection.thtml

see 6th paragraph

An interesting link Lynne. My immediate reaction is to question why references to "alleged" criminal offences should not be included in adoption paperwork?  Surely it should be?

It's the social worker I feel sorry for. 

Here is the full ICO report, a bit heavy going though.

 http://www.ico.gov.uk/news/latest_news/2012/~/media/documents/library/Data_Protection/Notices/devon_county_council_monetary_penalty_notice.ashx
 

As the crime is alleged it should not be included until proven guilty. Whilst I have sympathy for the worker who made the error its the tax payer who will pick up the £90.000 bill.

Normally that would be right @User4549.  But in this wonderful quangocracy of ours, the Information Commissioner can fine "data controllers" such as DCC without it going anyway near a court of law, to be proven guilty or not.  (They can appeal but that's not to a law court either).

@Daverc the "alleged" crimes refer to the persons seeking to adopt a child. The reason why, in my opinion, this information is actually relevant, is because social services should be allowed to defer a decision until after the "alleged" crimes have been proven or disproven in a court of law. It should be recorded and held on file until that point in time only. 

Imagine the uproar in the Daily Mail if an adoption was granted to a paedophile who hadn't yet been found guilty?  An extreme but perfectly plausible scenario if ALL facts aren't recorded when making such a big decision. 

OK, I misunderstood the reference.