ICO investigation reveals how charities have been exploiting supporters

neil_g

neil_g

Suspended / Banned
Messages
30,364
Name
Neil
Edit My Images
No
RSPCA and British Heart Foundation fined by the ICO. Cant say I'm surprised by RSPCA.

https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/ne...ow-charities-have-been-exploiting-supporters/

"The ICO said so-called “wealth screening” was one of three different ways both charities breached the Data Protection Act by failing to handle donors’ personal data consistent with the legislation.

The charities also traced and targeted new or lapsed donors by piecing together personal information obtained from other sources. And they traded personal details with other charities creating a massive pool of donor data for sale.

Donors were not informed of these practices, and so were unable to consent or object."
 
Pretty shocking stuff.
In situations like this the fines should be levied on the Trustees for mismanaging the organisations.

I hope the Charities Commission take pretty strong action.
 
I have very little faith in any large charity. And this has cemented my lake of faith.
 
However you want to look at it the large charities are multi million pound "companies" As such I see no issue with them employing the best people they can. That may well mean six figure salaries. The alternative is well meaning people with no business sense.
 
Are there no top flight business people who would be happy to give a few hours of their time for free?
 
So, they share a pool of data regarding previous donors.
Does this mean said donors are forced to further donate?
 
simon ess said:
Are there no top flight business people who would be happy to give a few hours of their time for free?
Click to expand...

Many people like that are on charities boards. The charities commission also require charities to have "good governance"
 
viv1969 said:
So, they share a pool of data regarding previous donors.
Does this mean said donors are forced to further donate?
Click to expand...
That's not really the point though, is it?
 
Llamaman said:
That's not really the point though, is it?
Click to expand...
I'd say yes.
Do you think your bank doesn't share your details?
Your utility providers?
Your mobile/internet providers?
 
An here's me thinking I'd run out of charities to donate to, and all the time there was my bank, the electric board and o2 I could be giving free stuff to.

well, ya live en learn
 
joxby said:
An here's me thinking I'd run out of charities to donate to, and all the time there was my bank, the electric board and o2 I could be giving free stuff to.

well, ya live en learn
Click to expand...

The point is, whomever you donate to, you do it by choice.
Whether or not they pass on your information to others is fairly irrelevant.
 
Umm

No, its not the point and its not irrelevant, or there'd be no thread for you to be obtuse in would there
 
viv1969 said:
I'd say yes.
Do you think your bank doesn't share your details?
Your utility providers?
Your mobile/internet providers?
Click to expand...
If any of those entities are breaching the DPA they risk the same trouble.

You can 'assume' the worst, but the law is quite specific.
 
Phil V said:
If any of those entities are breaching the DPA they risk the same trouble.

You can 'assume' the worst, but the law is quite specific.
Click to expand...

I quite agree, but I don't find it any more shocking that charities breach the law than other business, and IMO those that are, are rather naive.
 
Llamaman said:
That's not really the point though, is it?
Click to expand...
I'd say it was. They could share/steal data until they are blue in the face, it doesn't matter a toss if the people don't donate as a result. Charities send out letters, they have obviously got peoples addresses from the electoral role, how is that any different.
 
In what way is this different from Google and Facebook using information about you to serve up targeted adverts? (Apart from whether it may or may not be technically legal.) Genuine question.
 
viv1969 said:
So, they share a pool of data regarding previous donors.
Does this mean said donors are forced to further donate?
Click to expand...

you've heard of the data protection act?

StewartR said:
In what way is this different from Google and Facebook using information about you to serve up targeted adverts? (Apart from whether it may or may not be technically legal.) Genuine question.
Click to expand...

not quite the same, while they can use things like cookies to target advertising they're not actually using any of your personal data that you have physically submitted to them.
 
There are worse practices than this, some so called military charities paying collection companies, so you only about 20% or less gets to the charity.
 
neil_g said:
you've heard of the data protection act?
Click to expand...

Yes, I have, and as previously posted, anyone who believes the act isn't breached with regular monotony is naive.
The entities named in this thread have simply broken the 11th commandment.
 
neil_g said:
which is not the point of the thread. sure it most likely goes on a lot but 2 charities/companies have been caught in the act and "punished".
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
viv1969 said:
Yes, I have, and as previously posted, anyone who believes the act isn't breached with regular monotony is naive.
The entities named in this thread have simply broken the 11th commandment.
Click to expand...

And the 12th commandment - when caught, don't tell the regulator that you knew it was illegal, that you do it all the time, and have no intention of stopping.

They clearly thought they'd be let off lightly as the ICO wouldn't want to be seen to be hammering a charity, and sure enough the ICO has obliged.
 
It's wrong and it's illegal. If commercial businesses did it they would be hit by massive fines, the charities are punished far less harshly, which IMO is wrong.

If I donate to a charity then I do it anonomously, so that they can't ring me, email me or text me ad nauseum, which IMO is also wrong. Many people's lives have been made a misery because of their tactics, and there have even been suicides over it.
 
Charity begins at home for me - I just don't trust them (especially since I saw how they operated when my sister in law was an employee of quite a famous charity).
 
Fining these charities is pointless as it just means that some of the money that has been given by donors will be used to pay the fines.

A far better solution would be to hand out immediate lifetime bands on employment by any charitable institution of all of the employees, of any charity, who instigated and/or knew of these practices, coupled with the seizure of all monies contributed by the charities to the employees personal pension funds.

That way the people who committed the illegal action would suffer and not the charity itself, it would also send a very strong message to all of those involved in the management of any charity that if they don't obey the law they will be made to suffer for their actions.
 
Stopped donating to 'big' charities a while ago, keep mine local.
I'm disgusted by the salaries of those at the top and even lower down, when volunteers give of their time for genuine reasons of charity themselves.
But I really find it abhorrent that charities are needed at all in the 21st century.
 
tom24 said:
Stopped donating to 'big' charities a while ago, keep mine local.
I'm disgusted by the salaries of those at the top and even lower down, when volunteers give of their time for genuine reasons of charity themselves.
But I really find it abhorrent that charities are needed at all in the 21st century.
Click to expand...

:agree:
 
Earley Man said:
Fining these charities is pointless as it just means that some of the money that has been given by donors will be used to pay the fines.

A far better solution would be to hand out immediate lifetime bands on employment by any charitable institution of all of the employees, of any charity, who instigated and/or knew of these practices, coupled with the seizure of all monies contributed by the charities to the employees personal pension funds.

That way the people who committed the illegal action would suffer and not the charity itself, it would also send a very strong message to all of those involved in the management of any charity that if they don't obey the law they will be made to suffer for their actions.
Click to expand...
StewartR said:
Fining the trustees might be less pointless.
Click to expand...
The trustees are responsible for good governance and at present can be held personally liable for their actions - which includes the actions of employees, because they are responsible for the actions of those employees. If those rules don't already allow them to be fined in situations like this, it wouldn't be difficult to make the necesary changes.

Problem is, the governing body is The Charities Commission, and like many other such bodies they are under resourced and ineffective - they've gone from being a well set up organisation to what is now basically little more than a website.
I'm a Trustee myself, have been for 26 years, and a couple of years ago, when I needed advice about making some changes, it was very difficult to get hold of an actual, real person at The Charities Commission, so my guess is that they now able to do very little policing of the way in which charities are run.
 
tom24 said:
Stopped donating to 'big' charities a while ago, keep mine local.
I'm disgusted by the salaries of those at the top and even lower down, when volunteers give of their time for genuine reasons of charity themselves.
But I really find it abhorrent that charities are needed at all in the 21st century.
Click to expand...

I can't think of any society that exists without charities. (be they formal or informal) When the bigger charities have an "income" that would place them in the FSTE 100 it would be unthinkable not to have a paid CEO (paid in line with other similar business)
Also remember a lot of charities do take on government contracts so need paid staff to complete them.
charities that carry out research have to pay docters laboratory staff etc.
You could not have these people being overseen by well meaning but untrained/unpaid people.

Love your idea of utopia, but in the real world, we need and will continue to need charities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top