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

My understanding is that you have to request the individual search engines to de-list you under the EU "right to be forgotten" ruling. If they don't, then that is when you make a complaint to the ICO.

Happy to be corrected as I'm hoping to make a similar request in a year and a half.

Hi,

Thats correct this form: https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/legal-removal-request?complaint_type=rtbf&hl=en&rd=1

for google needs to be completed.

Indeed it is. I have spoken to google previously and they gave a very generic response which again was part of my argument. I have made the complaint to the ICO already and it is being looked into, As I say they emailed asking for evidence of the search results listed as a search of my name only got back 1 result in the first 6 pages (the other results are on pages from 8/9/10) and I was confused as to why it matters what page they are on. As I say I cant find any information or case studies relating to the relevance of what page the results are listen on.

I'm not sure the answer. You could send them a screendump with the offending articles circled. Where results appear in the list changes all the time, indeed it is affected by where you are located and if you are logged in. If you are in a particular city results about that city may rank higher. For those reasons I don't think they should discard the seriousness of how low the results are ranking, as that can easily change. And that is something you could point out to them. However, they may argue that most people do not go past the first few pages, so it is less serious. I don't know, that is just a guess of their mindset, or they are simply too lazy to click through the results and evaluate your case properly. It may be that the results rank much higher if someone searches on your name and the city where you live. I'm not sure if they can or do take that into account though?

Thanks for the reply. I just find it very odd that they would mention the "first 6 pages". Maybe I am over thinking it however this incident has in all intense and purposes ruined a life I spent years building and in the blink of an eye it's gone. I accept what I done was stupid and should never of taken place however it's not criminal. It's funny I spent years dealing with people with convictions from murder all the way down to petty theft but I always made a point of dealing with them how I found them not on their past mistakes or circumstances and here I am asking an organisation to help me not be judged on a past mistake.    

Forget criminality. Because I had a bit of "notoriety" before my conviction, there were a few newspaper articles on me about some inappropriate tweets I had made. In context there was nothing wrong with them, but some people took offence hence the news items. They caused me to lose several job applications, so nothing to do with spent convictions. That is the world we live in now. 

You need to fill this form in: https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/legal-removal-request?complaint_type=rtbf&hl=en&rd=1

You need to fill this form in: https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/legal-removal-request?complaint_type=rtbf&hl=en&rd=1

As I say I've completed the process and the complaint is currently with ICO. My question is around the ICO's question to me about the search results only returning 1 result in the first 6 pages and the rest being over pages 8/9/10 and its relevance i.e why it would matter what page the results were on and any case law around this.