theForum

ICO Delisting request


https://forum.unlock.org.uk/Topic28500.aspx

By LostSole - 14 Aug 20 1:11 PM

Good afternoon,

I recently applied to the ICO to have several links removed from google search results due to the negative impact they are having on my life. To cut a long story short I was a public servant when I was arrested for a criminal offence however after conducting their investigation and providing a full account of myself it was deemed that their was no criminal intent on my behalf and charging standards weren't met in any shape or form. However I was then taken to a misconduct hearing whereby my actions were found to be of gross misconducted due to the nature of the incident and the impact it would have on public trust in the public sector I worked in. As I say I held my hands up, accepted it was a stupid mistake and helped as much as I could throughout the process.

At the time I had no idea the storm I was about to walk into however in hindsight I should of expected it. Due to being a public servant the misconduct hearing was held with the press able to attend. As with most misconduct hearings the facts were presented in a way that was lets say tilted to one side and key elements were left out i.e the reasons for no criminal case, my defence and lack of criminal intent etc and as a result gross misconduct found and I would of been sacked on the spot If I hadn't already resigned my position.

Now 1 person from the media attended and put a very basic release on their webpage however over the following days other media outlets put out news releases which got further from the truth and more towards headline grabbing, clickbaiting and generally nasty comments, keeping in mind no criminal case was being pursued as no criminal offence had been committed yet I was being written about in a manor that a serial offender might find himself being written about. 

So after suffering from ill health due to this for a number of years I finally decided enough was enough and I had to do something about this as I can't secure employment and in all intense and purposes I've been bankrupted due to this. So I applied to the ICO to have the links removed and provided my evidence and used several stated cases in my application, After a wait I received notification that the case was now being looked into and I would hear back within a few weeks. I received a reply the other day asking to provide evidence that the links are still visible on google and haven't been de-listed as they could only find 1 on the first 6 pages of the google search.

This got me slightly confused as in my research and everything I've read on the subject at no point does it mention the search results have to be on "x" amount of pages. Has anyone got any better knowledge of this or have had any dealings with this issue and if so what was the outcome. Any help / knowledge would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks
By LostSole - 28 Aug 20 2:37 PM

Thank you for your comments I appreciate it. So I’m going to take a few days to think this over before I take my next steps however I don’t feel i can just leave it be and feel the need to ensure others don’t come across this issue. It has to be resolved one way or another and as most solicitors firms are only interested in the pay packet and don’t really care too much about peoples lives it would seem action is required. I do not know how far I will get but I think I owe it to myself and anyone else who is being fobbed off. My guts instinct tells me that although an independent organisation I feel they themselves are stereotyping people and pre judging individuals, I feel they like so many are scared to act and remove things just in case that person goes on to do something bad and the information about a de-listing to come out.

I think my first step will be to speak to a few solicitorfirms to ask what sort of push back they have gotten in relation to this “6 or7” page nonsense. Once I have got an idea from them hopefully this will shed some light and give me a little more understanding but currently, I feel something is not right here and needs exploring.

The funny thing about the whole case is that I don’t / didn’texpect the ICO to agree with me however I did expect a more professional approachand at the very least for them to consider the evidence I provided having spendseveral weeks to produce the 9 page document including case law, judgements, amongst other things. The 1 URL (BBC) that they have provided reasons for not taking action against I fully understand the reasoning so its not as though i am being unreasonable. I just want the other 5 URL's to be looked at and a judgement made and not simply we wont look at them because its outside our guidelines of 6 or 7 pages.