theForum is run by the charity Unlock. We do not actively moderate, monitor or edit contributions but we may intervene and take any action as we think necessary. Further details can be found in our terms of use. If you have any concerns over the contents on our site, please either register those concerns using the report-a-post button or email us at forum@unlock.org.uk.


Tried... and Failed :(


Tried... and Failed :(

Author
Message
Debbie Sadler
Debbie Sadler
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 398, Visits: 6K
link - 16 Sep 16 3:19 AM
Hi Debbie,

Its taken me almost four weeks to pluck up the courage but I have finally decided to take your advice and send a complaint to the ICO, I do not hold out much hope given the response I got from Google but I shall update you with the results.

I also found some interesting links here:

https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/europeprivacy/?hl=en


Hi Link

Glad to hear that you've contacted the ICO. I'll keep my fingers crossed that you get a positive result.

Thanks for sending the link over, not sure if you saw this but, in light of your contact with the ICO it looks pretty positive

'After we removed a news story about a minor crime, the newspaper published a story about the removal action. The Information Commissioner’s Office ordered us to remove the second story from search results for the individual’s name. We removed the page from search results for the individual's name.'

Look forward to hearing some great news soon.

Debs 

Need Unlocks advice? Visit our self-help information site or contact our helpline
link
link
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 147, Visits: 34
Hi Debbie,

Its taken me almost four weeks to pluck up the courage but I have finally decided to take your advice and send a complaint to the ICO, I do not hold out much hope given the response I got from Google but I shall update you with the results.

I also found some interesting links here:

https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/europeprivacy/?hl=en


Edited
9 Years Ago by link
Debbie Sadler
Debbie Sadler
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)Supreme Being (174K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 398, Visits: 6K
link - 24 Aug 16 9:45 PM
Hi,

It recently came to my attention that a rather unsavoury website had made reference to my conviction many years after the fact, following this I became aware that information relating to my past had jumped back up the search ranks putting my livelihood and relatively solitary existence at possible risk, the extent to which certain "keywords" seemed to bring up my past was quite alarming so I decided to take the plunge and try and have the links removed...

My application to Google can be summarised as below:

For each URL you provided, please explain:

(1) how the linked URL relates to you (or, if you are submitting this form on behalf of someone else, why the page is about that person); and
(2) why the content on this URL in search results is distributed unlawfully, inaccurate, or outdated.

We may ask you to provide additional documents in support of your request. We will not be able to process your complaint without this information.

The supplied list of URL's  include personal details relating to a spent conviction, the provided URL's should not be included in search results as the conviction was spent in XXXX under the 1974 Rehabilitation of Offenders Act (ROA), since the conviction has been wiped out by law and the duration which has elapsed my right to privacy outweighs any public interest. The reporting of a spent conviction (by means of search results or cached content etc.) is an act of defamation, the search results are no longer relevant since the conviction is spent, the search results are outdated by many years and otherwise inappropriate to be displayed as current events. I request that should you approve my application that you do not inform any webmaster(s) of the URLs listed above which would thereby reveal information pertaining to myself.

I represent that the information in this request is accurate and that I am the person affected by the web pages identified, or I am authorized by the person affected to submit this request.


I received a nice response almost instantly...

Hi, Thanks for reaching out to us!

We have received your legal request. Your message is in our queue, and we'll process your request as quickly as our workload permits. We may reach out to you for further information if needed for us to understand and handle your request.

Regards,
The Google Team



Well not surprisingly two weeks later this is the response I get back:

Hi, Thanks for reaching out to us!

With regards to the following URLs:

www.a.n.other.com

It is Google’s understanding that the information about you on this/these URLs - with regard to all the circumstances of the case we are aware of - is still relevant in relation to the purposes of data processing, and therefore the reference to this document in our search results is justified by the public interest.

At this time, Google has decided not to take action on these URLs.

You may wish to send your request for removal directly to the webmaster, who controls the site in question. The webmaster has the ability to remove the content in question from the web, or block it from appearing in search engines.

You can visit https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/9109 to learn how to contact a site's webmaster.

If outdated content from a site is still appearing in Google Search results, you can ask Google to update or remove the page using our webpage removal request tool at https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/removals.

You may also have the right to raise this issue with your country’s data protection authority if you are unhappy with the decision that Google has taken.

Regards,
The Google Team



Well that's me thoroughly depressed for my efforts... any advice from the new spangled forum?


Hi Link

Looks like you might be one of the first to post on the 'new spangled forum' - thanks for that.

Really disappointing response from Google.  Your next step should be to make a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office - you can do it online .  Just this week we've heard from somebody who did just that. The ICO agreed that the information was outdated and no longer relevant and instructed Google to remove the link.  So it's well worth a try.

Good luck. Let us know how you get on.  




Need Unlocks advice? Visit our self-help information site or contact our helpline
link
link
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)Supreme Being (20K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 147, Visits: 34
Hi,

It recently came to my attention that a rather unsavoury website had made reference to my conviction many years after the fact, following this I became aware that information relating to my past had jumped back up the search ranks putting my livelihood and relatively solitary existence at possible risk, the extent to which certain "keywords" seemed to bring up my past was quite alarming so I decided to take the plunge and try and have the links removed...

My application to Google can be summarised as below:

For each URL you provided, please explain:

(1) how the linked URL relates to you (or, if you are submitting this form on behalf of someone else, why the page is about that person); and
(2) why the content on this URL in search results is distributed unlawfully, inaccurate, or outdated.

We may ask you to provide additional documents in support of your request. We will not be able to process your complaint without this information.

The supplied list of URL's  include personal details relating to a spent conviction, the provided URL's should not be included in search results as the conviction was spent in XXXX under the 1974 Rehabilitation of Offenders Act (ROA), since the conviction has been wiped out by law and the duration which has elapsed my right to privacy outweighs any public interest. The reporting of a spent conviction (by means of search results or cached content etc.) is an act of defamation, the search results are no longer relevant since the conviction is spent, the search results are outdated by many years and otherwise inappropriate to be displayed as current events. I request that should you approve my application that you do not inform any webmaster(s) of the URLs listed above which would thereby reveal information pertaining to myself.

I represent that the information in this request is accurate and that I am the person affected by the web pages identified, or I am authorized by the person affected to submit this request.


I received a nice response almost instantly...

Hi, Thanks for reaching out to us!

We have received your legal request. Your message is in our queue, and we'll process your request as quickly as our workload permits. We may reach out to you for further information if needed for us to understand and handle your request.

Regards,
The Google Team



Well not surprisingly two weeks later this is the response I get back:

Hi, Thanks for reaching out to us!

With regards to the following URLs:

www.a.n.other.com

It is Google’s understanding that the information about you on this/these URLs - with regard to all the circumstances of the case we are aware of - is still relevant in relation to the purposes of data processing, and therefore the reference to this document in our search results is justified by the public interest.

At this time, Google has decided not to take action on these URLs.

You may wish to send your request for removal directly to the webmaster, who controls the site in question. The webmaster has the ability to remove the content in question from the web, or block it from appearing in search engines.

You can visit https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/9109 to learn how to contact a site's webmaster.

If outdated content from a site is still appearing in Google Search results, you can ask Google to update or remove the page using our webpage removal request tool at https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/removals.

You may also have the right to raise this issue with your country’s data protection authority if you are unhappy with the decision that Google has taken.

Regards,
The Google Team



Well that's me thoroughly depressed for my efforts... any advice from the new spangled forum?


Edited
9 Years Ago by link
 
GO


Similar Topics


As a small but national charity, we rely on charitable grants and individual donations to continue running theForum. We do not deliver government services. By being independent, we are able to respond to the needs of the people with convictions. Help us keep theForum going.

Donate Online

Login
Existing Account
Email Address:


Password:


Login
Select a Forum....
























































































































































































theForum


Search