|
AB2014
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 7K
|
+xThe ICO is a waste of time. They won't do anything, trust me. The right to be forgotten is a waste of time too - they will only delist in certain circumstances, and you need to provide every possible search term you can think of linking your name to the articles. Further, it only applies to searches within the EU, so any Tom, Dick or Harry using a VPN or googling you from outside the EU will see your articles. Your only options are to either convince the source to delete the articles, or change your name. You don't provide the search terms. You need to provide a list of links to the webpages that name you.
=========================================================================================================
If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)
|
|
|
|
|
Lineofduty
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 69,
Visits: 345
|
+x+xHaving no luck getting my name unlinked to these vigilante web sites with Google or the ICO i thought I would try a different angle so have just sent this to the ICO Be interesting to see what their response is if they bother to reply LOL Hello, I am contacting you to ask if you are aware of two vigilante websites https://tedteamsite.wordpress.com/& https://uk-database.org/Under the UK Sexual Offences Act 2003 the general public do not have access to the Sexual Offenders Register. This is restricted the police and the courts although a request can be made under the Child Sex Offender Disclosure Scheme but again this is managed by the police. The two websites above are in fact searchable databases with photos and addresses of people convicted of sexual offences so are in all but name a public sex offenders register but neither comply to any data protection or GDPR rules. Surly these two websites are breaking the law and should be shutdown. Please can you let me have the ICO view on these two websites. Regards Reply from ICO is pretty dismissive so I wont be holding my breath! Thank you for your email of 17 March 2023 We will look into this, if we decide to take action then it will be on our website. I had similar interaction with ICO about the lack of GDPR, Privacy Rights, illegal centralised Register/database. The guy didn't help me personally but took all my info "as part of their wider work (on UK Database)". Some time later it was closed down, only to spring back up as ".org" and not ".net A bit like hammering the head of a mole who goes back down and re-appears continously. But, seriously, you are right in all that you say.
|
|
|
|
|
david123
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21,
Visits: 1.8K
|
+xHaving no luck getting my name unlinked to these vigilante web sites with Google or the ICO i thought I would try a different angle so have just sent this to the ICO Be interesting to see what their response is if they bother to reply LOL Hello, I am contacting you to ask if you are aware of two vigilante websites https://tedteamsite.wordpress.com/& https://uk-database.org/Under the UK Sexual Offences Act 2003 the general public do not have access to the Sexual Offenders Register. This is restricted the police and the courts although a request can be made under the Child Sex Offender Disclosure Scheme but again this is managed by the police. The two websites above are in fact searchable databases with photos and addresses of people convicted of sexual offences so are in all but name a public sex offenders register but neither comply to any data protection or GDPR rules. Surly these two websites are breaking the law and should be shutdown. Please can you let me have the ICO view on these two websites. Regards Reply from ICO is pretty dismissive so I wont be holding my breath! Thank you for your email of 17 March 2023 We will look into this, if we decide to take action then it will be on our website.
|
|
|
|
|
khafka
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 320,
Visits: 17K
|
+xHaving no luck getting my name unlinked to these vigilante web sites with Google or the ICO i thought I would try a different angle so have just sent this to the ICO Be interesting to see what their response is if they bother to reply LOL Hello, I am contacting you to ask if you are aware of two vigilante websites https://tedteamsite.wordpress.com/& https://uk-database.org/Under the UK Sexual Offences Act 2003 the general public do not have access to the Sexual Offenders Register. This is restricted the police and the courts although a request can be made under the Child Sex Offender Disclosure Scheme but again this is managed by the police. The two websites above are in fact searchable databases with photos and addresses of people convicted of sexual offences so are in all but name a public sex offenders register but neither comply to any data protection or GDPR rules. Surly these two websites are breaking the law and should be shutdown. Please can you let me have the ICO view on these two websites. Regards I did a similar thing a couple of years ago and the response from ICO was essentially: "Nothing we can do. If you feel it's breaking the law then report it to the police"
|
|
|
|
|
david123
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21,
Visits: 1.8K
|
Having no luck getting my name unlinked to these vigilante web sites with Google or the ICO i thought I would try a different angle so have just sent this to the ICO Be interesting to see what their response is if they bother to reply LOL Hello, I am contacting you to ask if you are aware of two vigilante websites https://tedteamsite.wordpress.com/& https://uk-database.org/Under the UK Sexual Offences Act 2003 the general public do not have access to the Sexual Offenders Register. This is restricted the police and the courts although a request can be made under the Child Sex Offender Disclosure Scheme but again this is managed by the police. The two websites above are in fact searchable databases with photos and addresses of people convicted of sexual offences so are in all but name a public sex offenders register but neither comply to any data protection or GDPR rules. Surly these two websites are breaking the law and should be shutdown. Please can you let me have the ICO view on these two websites. Regards
|
|
|
|
|
punter99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 728,
Visits: 5.3K
|
+xUnlock do recommend https://www.mycleanslate.co.uk/ they charge a one off fee of £250 to get info on Google removed and an additional £100 each for Bing & Yahoo I am thinking about using them myself as both Google and the ICO have refused my requests. I would be interested to hear if anyone else has used them I don't think these organisations are doing anything that a person couldn't do themselves. It just depends how you set out your arguments. Maybe Google and the ICO just respond to requests when they come from a legal firm, with a fancy letterhead and some legal jargon, because they think the solicitors know something about the law that they don't? I wonder if the Citizens Advice Bureau could offer free advice on how to draft a letter to the ICO for example?
|
|
|
|
|
david123
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21,
Visits: 1.8K
|
Unlock do recommend https://www.mycleanslate.co.uk/ they charge a one off fee of £250 to get info on Google removed and an additional £100 each for Bing & Yahoo I am thinking about using them myself as both Google and the ICO have refused my requests. I would be interested to hear if anyone else has used them
|
|
|
|
|
AB2014
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 7K
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI agree with the idea behind this article, but don't forget that the last Information Commissioner said that they wouldn't help in cases where the conviction is unspent. This is my take. Whilst my conviction is unspent, regardless of how badly it impacts me, I still have to inform employers, insurance companies and letting agencies. Without a (unlikely) change in the law it's public information. Unfortunately my name is rather unique and I did had a pre-conviction public profile. I've not goggled my name for 5 years. who knows what horrors are out there for me to confront!
However, once my conviction is spent, I will make an effort to get links removed.
Technically, you have to inform employers, insurers and letting agencies if you are asked. Insurers often hide question among the assumptions in their policy documents or other paperwork, so you can't assume that they don't want to know. Unless you are subject to direction from probation or the police, there is no obligation on you to disclose voluntarily. Once your conviction is spent, you should be able to get links removed, if you fill in the forms correctly and spoon-feed them the information. That might include proof that your conviction is actually spent, as one of our regulars has been finding out by applying to the ICO with a spent conviction. My offence was a none contact downloading offence for which I was given a 12 month suspended sentence 7 years ago. After five years I managed to get my SHPO discharged and my conviction is now legally spent but still Google refuses to remove links to my name to two grubby vigilante sites as "Its in the public interest". I complained to the ICO attaching a copy of my SHPO discharge notice from the court but still they backed Google's decision so I just think the ICO has no interest if you are a convicted SO My offence was also a download-based one (images). It does appear that Google and ICO really aren't interested if you're an SO unless it's a really old one like 20+ years. The "public interest" thing feels like a load of nonsense easy excuse too as there doesn't seem to be any real set standard for what constitutes "public interest". For example, I applied to Bing and to get results about me removed, they removed them the first time I asked and they were gone in about 3 days from their confirmation. Google says it is still in the public interest. What metric are they running to back that up? Is it a case of XX amount of people still searching for me and my offence every day? Because I refuse to believe people are still searching about me years on from when I was last reported about at sentencing. I posted in another thread about my efforts with ICO and they're just being quite dickish about it, to be honest and you have no way to appeal ICO's decision either. My latest effort I took nearly 6 months (due to their backlog) from my initial application, after 6 months of nothing I basically got "we're not going to speak to Google, piss off". So if I want to combat that I'd need to submit a new enquiry and go to the back of the queue, I can't just reply saying I disagree because XYZ or whatever - It's an utterly ludicrous system. I reckon the only real way to get any proper movement on Google removals at the moment if you're an SO is a legal-based route. By that I mean getting an actual solicitor involved saying "You need to remove these links because Law-X, you're infringing this because Law-Y, failure to comply will result in blahblahblah". Having just tried again to get details of my spent conviction on a couple of vigilante sites removed from search results on my name and given the same 'still in the public interest' refusal reason by Google and the ICO I am thinking of taking legal advice. has anyone used Carter-Ruck law the firm recommended by Unlock? Or has anyone had any success getting information on spent convictions removed using a solicitor? Hi Brand new user here with some experience of this so I thought I'd post it. I am on a 10 year SHPO for downloading/making indecent images. Suspended sentence would have been spent now if it weren't for the SHPO. Ex wife clubbed together with an obsessive vigilante type who sent his wife to all my court appearances, wrote an article on me, complete with stolen photo from social media, hosted in the States so no chance of removing it (haven't got the original photo so I can't prove copyright either). I had a pretty unusual surname which means it was easy to find me. I moved, changed my name and unfortunately someone still connected it to my new name via the photo, as by terrible luck they saw me in the street, circulated it on facebook and someone in my 'new life' in a hobby forum recognised me. I've now left social media and not seeing any of those people any more so hopefully that 'link' isn't too polluted. However, I work as an IT contractor and am now in that limbo where my references are under my old name. Although the references know my new name, I recently failed an application because the client I applied to noticed my name change (I guess they saw it on the references) and googled me. So the contract fell through. I applied to Google to remove them - no. Went to the ICO. ICO ruled with google for ridiculous reasons of a) it's a blog so just opinion (actually the fact it's in 'blog format' doesn't make it 'a blog') and b) in your name change you said you'd revoked your previous name so it doesn't fall under GDPR as it mentions a name you don't go by now. The last point is too ridiculous to even discuss! I came across these people: interneterasure.co.uk. They have loads of 5 star reviews on trustpilot and I messaged them with a potted history. They replied within the hour with a detailed response. They had even found the link without my help, and pointed out that in fact the article didn't appear on the first page of search results, but more worryingly, Google had added a search suggestion: "Other people search for John Smith Scunthorpe" (name and town where I lived when I was convicted changed). Thanks, Google. Interestingly, they also worked out when my offence would be spent - my PPO is pretty rubbish, hardly ever sees me, and when I asked him to confirm when my offence would be spent he completely ignored the SHPO! They corrected that! And all of this before I engaged them. I've signed up with them. Their fees are a one-off initial payment of £249 then five payments of £100. This covers them working on the case ***until all results are de-indexed in UK and EU from all search engines***. If anyone's interested I will post on here as things develop but I was very impressed not just by their reviews but also by how much info they gave me free of charge. The company appears to be run by the wife of an ex-convict who has gone on to write books about getting jobs, rebuilding your life etc and also appears on TV. I am not connected in any way with this site! Just wanted to point it out as, if they do what they say, I will feel like I can breathe again. I contacted Unlock about this a while ago, and I think someone else posted about them on the Forum somewhere. They say they are recommended by Unlock, but Debbie told me that they aren't, and that they have not replied to any attempts at contact. She said they might be doing good work, and Unlock might want to recommend them, but there is no way to be sure. If they are using fake recommendations, I think that comes under false advertising. So, maybe they're really good, or maybe they just put in a bit of work at first to get your money, and then just say, "Sorry, but we did our best", even if they didn't. It's up to each individual to make their own decision.
=========================================================================================================
If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)
|
|
|
|
|
punter99
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 728,
Visits: 5.3K
|
I'm slightly confused. The company says that they can help people with spent convictions, but from reading your story, it sounds as though yours isn't spent at the moment?
|
|
|
|
|
Lineofduty
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 69,
Visits: 345
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI agree with the idea behind this article, but don't forget that the last Information Commissioner said that they wouldn't help in cases where the conviction is unspent. This is my take. Whilst my conviction is unspent, regardless of how badly it impacts me, I still have to inform employers, insurance companies and letting agencies. Without a (unlikely) change in the law it's public information. Unfortunately my name is rather unique and I did had a pre-conviction public profile. I've not goggled my name for 5 years. who knows what horrors are out there for me to confront!
However, once my conviction is spent, I will make an effort to get links removed.
Technically, you have to inform employers, insurers and letting agencies if you are asked. Insurers often hide question among the assumptions in their policy documents or other paperwork, so you can't assume that they don't want to know. Unless you are subject to direction from probation or the police, there is no obligation on you to disclose voluntarily. Once your conviction is spent, you should be able to get links removed, if you fill in the forms correctly and spoon-feed them the information. That might include proof that your conviction is actually spent, as one of our regulars has been finding out by applying to the ICO with a spent conviction. My offence was a none contact downloading offence for which I was given a 12 month suspended sentence 7 years ago. After five years I managed to get my SHPO discharged and my conviction is now legally spent but still Google refuses to remove links to my name to two grubby vigilante sites as "Its in the public interest". I complained to the ICO attaching a copy of my SHPO discharge notice from the court but still they backed Google's decision so I just think the ICO has no interest if you are a convicted SO My offence was also a download-based one (images). It does appear that Google and ICO really aren't interested if you're an SO unless it's a really old one like 20+ years. The "public interest" thing feels like a load of nonsense easy excuse too as there doesn't seem to be any real set standard for what constitutes "public interest". For example, I applied to Bing and to get results about me removed, they removed them the first time I asked and they were gone in about 3 days from their confirmation. Google says it is still in the public interest. What metric are they running to back that up? Is it a case of XX amount of people still searching for me and my offence every day? Because I refuse to believe people are still searching about me years on from when I was last reported about at sentencing. I posted in another thread about my efforts with ICO and they're just being quite dickish about it, to be honest and you have no way to appeal ICO's decision either. My latest effort I took nearly 6 months (due to their backlog) from my initial application, after 6 months of nothing I basically got "we're not going to speak to Google, piss off". So if I want to combat that I'd need to submit a new enquiry and go to the back of the queue, I can't just reply saying I disagree because XYZ or whatever - It's an utterly ludicrous system. I reckon the only real way to get any proper movement on Google removals at the moment if you're an SO is a legal-based route. By that I mean getting an actual solicitor involved saying "You need to remove these links because Law-X, you're infringing this because Law-Y, failure to comply will result in blahblahblah". Having just tried again to get details of my spent conviction on a couple of vigilante sites removed from search results on my name and given the same 'still in the public interest' refusal reason by Google and the ICO I am thinking of taking legal advice. has anyone used Carter-Ruck law the firm recommended by Unlock? Or has anyone had any success getting information on spent convictions removed using a solicitor? Hi Brand new user here with some experience of this so I thought I'd post it. I am on a 10 year SHPO for downloading/making indecent images. Suspended sentence would have been spent now if it weren't for the SHPO. Ex wife clubbed together with an obsessive vigilante type who sent his wife to all my court appearances, wrote an article on me, complete with stolen photo from social media, hosted in the States so no chance of removing it (haven't got the original photo so I can't prove copyright either). I had a pretty unusual surname which means it was easy to find me. I moved, changed my name and unfortunately someone still connected it to my new name via the photo, as by terrible luck they saw me in the street, circulated it on facebook and someone in my 'new life' in a hobby forum recognised me. I've now left social media and not seeing any of those people any more so hopefully that 'link' isn't too polluted. However, I work as an IT contractor and am now in that limbo where my references are under my old name. Although the references know my new name, I recently failed an application because the client I applied to noticed my name change (I guess they saw it on the references) and googled me. So the contract fell through. I applied to Google to remove them - no. Went to the ICO. ICO ruled with google for ridiculous reasons of a) it's a blog so just opinion (actually the fact it's in 'blog format' doesn't make it 'a blog') and b) in your name change you said you'd revoked your previous name so it doesn't fall under GDPR as it mentions a name you don't go by now. The last point is too ridiculous to even discuss! I came across these people: interneterasure.co.uk. They have loads of 5 star reviews on trustpilot and I messaged them with a potted history. They replied within the hour with a detailed response. They had even found the link without my help, and pointed out that in fact the article didn't appear on the first page of search results, but more worryingly, Google had added a search suggestion: "Other people search for John Smith Scunthorpe" (name and town where I lived when I was convicted changed). Thanks, Google. Interestingly, they also worked out when my offence would be spent - my PPO is pretty rubbish, hardly ever sees me, and when I asked him to confirm when my offence would be spent he completely ignored the SHPO! They corrected that! And all of this before I engaged them. I've signed up with them. Their fees are a one-off initial payment of £249 then five payments of £100. This covers them working on the case ***until all results are de-indexed in UK and EU from all search engines***. If anyone's interested I will post on here as things develop but I was very impressed not just by their reviews but also by how much info they gave me free of charge. The company appears to be run by the wife of an ex-convict who has gone on to write books about getting jobs, rebuilding your life etc and also appears on TV. I am not connected in any way with this site! Just wanted to point it out as, if they do what they say, I will feel like I can breathe again. Good luck. Keep us posted. The proof is in the pudding as you say. Most folk on here will be worried about the final cost as much as the firm's success I would suspect. Go for it !!
|
|
|
|