#11
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Q. Can I see who has searched for me on your website? No, all searches performed are confidential. Must be some hitherto unknown meaning of the word "confidential". |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Hmmm - Caja Data Espana Ltd registered as a company in August. The address where they are registered has more than 30,000 companies registered there.
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
We'd better all search quickly then, before the site is taken down!
__________________
"What you see depends on what you're looking for." Sue at Langley Vale |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
To confirm, No, all searches performed are confidential. Our search history only provides details of the search that was undertaken. It does not include any information about who has conducted the search. The search history is crawled by search engines which then provide links in their search results to a cached record of the original search. If you are listed in a search engine result then this will be due to a search conducted by someone that resulted in your name being included. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Although the company is new we have been busy processing data for many, many years so have no fear we are going nowhere
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
We process data from a variety of compliant data sources not only the Open electoral roll, On top of the electoral roll we have built into their people finding databases other data sets to provide current year coverage in excess of 44 million records for a UK nationwide people search. Every day there are thousands of new records being added. The FMP roll is supplied by 192 and is only the Open register without any consented data. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Willing to take a bet on this one.
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Thanks for the clarification. But I still don't think that a search can be described as "confidential" when details are posted on your site. I realise it doesn't say who was doing the searching, but it is still not what I understood "confidential" to mean when I read the FAQ's before doing my searches. |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
This is a long held fallacy. Even if a data subject is opted out of open registers, it does not mean it is unlawful to process the record under any circumstance!.It would be rightly unlawful to process the record if it had been obtained via the full register. If the same record has been obtained by a compliant source it makes no difference whether the data subject has opted out or not, the record is now consented and lawfully processed. In exactly the same way for an ex directory telephone number or indeed a TPS number, if the number is detailed within a consented database then the caveat no longer applies and can and will be processed lawfully and compliantly. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|