-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Uk400club 'list Of Lists' Etc Etc (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Johnny Allan
- Start date
- Status
Thing
Idiosyncratic
WTF? This is going to a court of law now? You do realise that all those involved will be made to look a laughing stock. The tabloids will love it.
From a non-twitching perspective, this whole situation is utterly bonkers. From a non-birding perspective (ie most of the population) it will go under the 'couldn't make it up' file.
From a non-twitching perspective, this whole situation is utterly bonkers. From a non-birding perspective (ie most of the population) it will go under the 'couldn't make it up' file.
Jane Turner
Well-known member
Actually I think it very well could be entirely made up, well at least the going to court aspect.....
)Jane
I shall make this one last post as both you and JA continue to make contributions at my expense and continue to defame my character by making your snide remarks....
The facts are as have been laid down....Johnny Allan raised a section 10 peitition against me which was followed up by contact made by the Commissioners Office after five independent complaints were made against my organisation and the list. I will be complying with their requests to make adjustments to the listings but will not be making any changes demanded by Johnny Allan. As this is clearly not acceptable in JA's view, his option will then be the court option, which I will have to defend (and as I say, if I lose, I shall discontinue the offending UK400 Club).
In the interim, I am busy upgrading the list database to incorporate all 704 BOURC Life Lists published in the public domain on Bubo, and there will be a new row alongside the UK400 Club list, so that both lists can fall alongside each other. So, if you want your BOURC life list included, please email me your respective totals. If your list is already in the public domain and has been personally uploaded, it is not an issue in terms of the Act.
I shall make this one last post as both you and JA continue to make contributions at my expense and continue to defame my character by making your snide remarks....
The facts are as have been laid down....Johnny Allan raised a section 10 peitition against me which was followed up by contact made by the Commissioners Office after five independent complaints were made against my organisation and the list. I will be complying with their requests to make adjustments to the listings but will not be making any changes demanded by Johnny Allan. As this is clearly not acceptable in JA's view, his option will then be the court option, which I will have to defend (and as I say, if I lose, I shall discontinue the offending UK400 Club).
In the interim, I am busy upgrading the list database to incorporate all 704 BOURC Life Lists published in the public domain on Bubo, and there will be a new row alongside the UK400 Club list, so that both lists can fall alongside each other. So, if you want your BOURC life list included, please email me your respective totals. If your list is already in the public domain and has been personally uploaded, it is not an issue in terms of the Act.
Paul Chapman
Well-known member
I have to say that personally I find all the DPA stuff a bit sad. It seems to be utilising an Act for a purpose for which it was not really designed. I also feel compelled to correct one element that Johnny Allan posted. When Lee published his Rare Birds magazine periodically (up to at least 1999), the Life List Totals, Guidelines to Contentious Records and Guidelines to Contentious Taxonomic Decisions were in the public domain so it is not the case that the List had never previously been known to a wider public domain – but it had slipped to a less public profile in the last decade.
There are a number of issues that clearly need to be addressed - the inclusion of individual’s totals without permission; accuracy (the numbers themselves); and transparency (the basis upon which the lists are compiled – taxonomy; countable records; and an individual’s sightings). I thought that I would have a crack at looking at Lee’s Steve Webb UK400 Club total as accuracy is quoted as a primary issue. (I have not called Lee as invited – quite bluntly since the invitation I’ve been attempting to cram in too much into my life as usual and have only looked at these things later in the night than I would wish to disturb him. He can check my basis against his spreadsheet.)
The BUBO combined BOURC, IRBC and Isle of Man list is 608 species. That includes five pending species – Black-bellied Storm-Petrel, Alder Flycatcher, Slaty-backed Gull, House Finch and White-winged Scoter which when deducted would make the official combined list 603 species (against which Steve Webb counts 545 species plus 4 of the pending ones). The official list includes two species which Lee does not count Slender-billed Curlew and Scottish (Parrot) Crossbill and one where Lee allows countable individuals and BUBO does not – Ruddy Shelduck. So effectively Steve Webb’s starting list on a UK400 club basis is 543 out of the starting 600 species which are shared by both lists. As the UK400 Club List is 659 species, there are 59 additional species to be considered.
Of those, I anticipate that 33 “species” which the UK400 Club count have been seen by all of the “Top 5” including Steve Webb being Greater Flamingo, Tundra Bean Goose (in addition to Taiga), Greenland White-fronted Goose (in addition to European), Ross’s Goose, Pale-bellied Brent Goose and Black Brant (in addition to Dark-bellied), Ruddy Shelduck, Falcated Duck, American White-winged and Stejneger’s Scoters, Marbled Duck, White-headed Duck, North American Hen Harrier, Booted Eagle, Hudsonian Whimbrel, Azorean Yellow-legged Gull, Slaty-backed Gull, American Least Tern, North American Black Tern, European Eagle Owl, Alder Flycatcher, Eastern Yellow Wagtail, Black-headed Wagtail and White Wagtail, Siberian Stonechat, Eastern Subalpine Warbler, Desert Lesser Whitethroat, Two-barred Greenish Warbler, Siberian Chiffchaff, House Crow, Northwestern Redpoll and Chestnut and Red-headed Buntings. (I know that I have seen all 33.)
I believe that there are a further 15 of which none of the Top Listers have seen individuals counted by the UK400 Club though on a few I do not know the actual details of which records are counted – White/Black-bellied Storm-Petrel, American Least Bittern, Chinese Pond Heron, Sacred Ibis, Wood Duck, Red-shouldered Hawk, South Polar Skua, American Sandwich Tern, White-rumped Swift, Northern Flicker, Middle Spotted Woodpecker, Caspian Stonechat, Field Sparrow and Rusty and Yellow-headed Blackbirds.
So this simply leaves 11 species which need to be checked and eliminated – back to the principle that comparisons are not that difficult – four of which I believe that Steve Webb has seen – Whistling Swan, Cinnamon Teal, Daurian Starling and Hornemann’s Arctic Redpoll and seven of where I do not believe that he has seen individuals counted by the UK400 Club – Yelkouan Shearwater, White Pelican, Black Vulture, Amur Wagtail, Bicknell’s Thrush, Mugimaki Flycatcher and Spotted Towhee so on that basis 543 + 33 + 4 = 580. I didn’t expect to get that answer. (That said, now that I have been through that process and checked what Lee counts, I know that my total is 5 too low at 559 – it should be 564 – and I can only think of two where an “alternative viewpoint” may exist - Royal Tern and Little Shearwater!) So I anticipate that the nub of the issue rests in those 11 controversial species which can swing the result from an official comparison to a UK400 Club comparison and change the order of the “Top 5”.
Having done that process, it is only fair as a result to have a crack at working out Lee’s BOURC, IRBC and Isle of Man list on a BUBO basis so using the 549 starting basis of Steve Webb’s list deduct Caspian Plover, Slender-billed Curlew, Yellow-bellied Sapsucker, Purple Martin, Crag Martin, Grey Catbird, White-crowned Black Wheatear, Thick-billed Warbler, Green Warbler, Citril Finch, Magnolia Warbler and Brown-headed Cowbird so minus 12 and on a BUBO basis, you have a total of 537 for Lee. (This allows Lee Pacific Swift (before anyone asks!) but disregards his Little Shearwater record as pending – otherwise if that record is included, the total is 538.)
But most importantly, these are only numbers – it is the birds that count! Most serious twitchers believe this which is why there is no appetite for an official comparative listing. Birding World tried it at the start – when Twitching magazine in 1987 – and it never took off because people were simply not interested.
All the best
Paul Chapman
There are a number of issues that clearly need to be addressed - the inclusion of individual’s totals without permission; accuracy (the numbers themselves); and transparency (the basis upon which the lists are compiled – taxonomy; countable records; and an individual’s sightings). I thought that I would have a crack at looking at Lee’s Steve Webb UK400 Club total as accuracy is quoted as a primary issue. (I have not called Lee as invited – quite bluntly since the invitation I’ve been attempting to cram in too much into my life as usual and have only looked at these things later in the night than I would wish to disturb him. He can check my basis against his spreadsheet.)
The BUBO combined BOURC, IRBC and Isle of Man list is 608 species. That includes five pending species – Black-bellied Storm-Petrel, Alder Flycatcher, Slaty-backed Gull, House Finch and White-winged Scoter which when deducted would make the official combined list 603 species (against which Steve Webb counts 545 species plus 4 of the pending ones). The official list includes two species which Lee does not count Slender-billed Curlew and Scottish (Parrot) Crossbill and one where Lee allows countable individuals and BUBO does not – Ruddy Shelduck. So effectively Steve Webb’s starting list on a UK400 club basis is 543 out of the starting 600 species which are shared by both lists. As the UK400 Club List is 659 species, there are 59 additional species to be considered.
Of those, I anticipate that 33 “species” which the UK400 Club count have been seen by all of the “Top 5” including Steve Webb being Greater Flamingo, Tundra Bean Goose (in addition to Taiga), Greenland White-fronted Goose (in addition to European), Ross’s Goose, Pale-bellied Brent Goose and Black Brant (in addition to Dark-bellied), Ruddy Shelduck, Falcated Duck, American White-winged and Stejneger’s Scoters, Marbled Duck, White-headed Duck, North American Hen Harrier, Booted Eagle, Hudsonian Whimbrel, Azorean Yellow-legged Gull, Slaty-backed Gull, American Least Tern, North American Black Tern, European Eagle Owl, Alder Flycatcher, Eastern Yellow Wagtail, Black-headed Wagtail and White Wagtail, Siberian Stonechat, Eastern Subalpine Warbler, Desert Lesser Whitethroat, Two-barred Greenish Warbler, Siberian Chiffchaff, House Crow, Northwestern Redpoll and Chestnut and Red-headed Buntings. (I know that I have seen all 33.)
I believe that there are a further 15 of which none of the Top Listers have seen individuals counted by the UK400 Club though on a few I do not know the actual details of which records are counted – White/Black-bellied Storm-Petrel, American Least Bittern, Chinese Pond Heron, Sacred Ibis, Wood Duck, Red-shouldered Hawk, South Polar Skua, American Sandwich Tern, White-rumped Swift, Northern Flicker, Middle Spotted Woodpecker, Caspian Stonechat, Field Sparrow and Rusty and Yellow-headed Blackbirds.
So this simply leaves 11 species which need to be checked and eliminated – back to the principle that comparisons are not that difficult – four of which I believe that Steve Webb has seen – Whistling Swan, Cinnamon Teal, Daurian Starling and Hornemann’s Arctic Redpoll and seven of where I do not believe that he has seen individuals counted by the UK400 Club – Yelkouan Shearwater, White Pelican, Black Vulture, Amur Wagtail, Bicknell’s Thrush, Mugimaki Flycatcher and Spotted Towhee so on that basis 543 + 33 + 4 = 580. I didn’t expect to get that answer. (That said, now that I have been through that process and checked what Lee counts, I know that my total is 5 too low at 559 – it should be 564 – and I can only think of two where an “alternative viewpoint” may exist - Royal Tern and Little Shearwater!) So I anticipate that the nub of the issue rests in those 11 controversial species which can swing the result from an official comparison to a UK400 Club comparison and change the order of the “Top 5”.
Having done that process, it is only fair as a result to have a crack at working out Lee’s BOURC, IRBC and Isle of Man list on a BUBO basis so using the 549 starting basis of Steve Webb’s list deduct Caspian Plover, Slender-billed Curlew, Yellow-bellied Sapsucker, Purple Martin, Crag Martin, Grey Catbird, White-crowned Black Wheatear, Thick-billed Warbler, Green Warbler, Citril Finch, Magnolia Warbler and Brown-headed Cowbird so minus 12 and on a BUBO basis, you have a total of 537 for Lee. (This allows Lee Pacific Swift (before anyone asks!) but disregards his Little Shearwater record as pending – otherwise if that record is included, the total is 538.)
But most importantly, these are only numbers – it is the birds that count! Most serious twitchers believe this which is why there is no appetite for an official comparative listing. Birding World tried it at the start – when Twitching magazine in 1987 – and it never took off because people were simply not interested.
All the best
Paul Chapman
Garry Bagnell
Well-known member
Lee, if you throw the towel in, I will keep a lifelist rankings (Premiership Bird Club) (500 or more species within Britain & Ireland) of people that do want to be listed. I hope I don't have to do this as you would do a much better job than me.
Last edited:
SaxonBirder
Active member
In response to a few questions. I have been birding since the mid-1980's and I still do today. Reason I am not a big BF reader or subscriber is I tend to read and I prefer email compared to online web forums. That is just me. I am a push technology freak!
However, I felt the need to post on this one because I hate the damage it is doing to birding and ornithology. The public perception of birding and scientific studies is tarnished by the actions of a few in the public arena. The trouble is for me is also the moral and ethical aspects.
If people wish to go birding/twitching and keep lists then it is their own business what they get up to. It is their own business where they chose to publish their lists. In fact a list could be considered to be copyright (if published elsewhere) as it is a publication of an individual. You just give say Bubo/Surfbirds rights to publish it - but do you sell your rights for others to copy it? You can save a webpage for personal use (some organisations would like you not to be able to do this), but to republish that information? That is a whole different ball park. (Having been to yet another conference on Copyright, Designs and Patents Act!)
However, it is not the right of a private members club to log the activities of birders and publish it without their consent behind the scenes and also draw their own conclusions.
I gave up the listing because I just enjoy ornithology and frankly I prefer my own adventures with my wife and children and the peace and quiet! I saw the way things were turning with the competition and things said on a certain Channel 4 documentary a decade ago? Remember those comments about certain birders? I had the feeling of deja-vu last year watching BBC4.
If I want to go and live in a police state where my every move is scrutinised I'd move to one. Yes I know we are full of CCTV cameras and logging devices, but we have laws to protect what is a personal right. Some people have mentioned the DVLA - well that's a Government body and we elect them on a mandate. It is up to you to change this with your vote and MP. We don't elect individuals to spy on others with regard to their private hobbies. I am a Data Controller and a Freedom of Information Officer. I actually train others on both acts and the implications to their work. Some of the data I deal with is sensitive (in the fact it is exempt from the DPA). However, I still have to follow the principles of the act, we are registered and our organisation could be prosecuted accordingly if it didn't follow the DPA and FoI. The organisation I work for serves several million people.
As for the morality of this. Well you can see the stress it is causing some individuals in what they are posting. Now for me I can't understand those people who go out of their way to cause this the stress and anxiety. Nor those who back any private members club up that might be causing such action by refusing to follow the requests of members of the public (which they have a legal right to)
Stress can cause and exacerbate many conditions, including cancers and depression. I would ask what goes through the mind of people who wish to do this to others. In my opinion it is clear. A number of individuals have asked not to be associated with a private members club and yet they are being stalked and harassed in public in their opinion. In turn those who run private members clubs are protesting that people are standing up for their rights. Just like they do (or have recently done) in Egypt, Bahrain and Syria. Yet what do we think about those dictators who like to be judge, jury and executioner - yet continue to wield unelected power in those countries? Do we all agree that the situation in those countries is what we see as moral?
I would also ask the question of those organisations and the media about why you would wish to associate yourself with any private members club that is behaving in an unfriendly and potentially illegal manner? How does YOUR business wish to be seen? or don't you care and think the publicity just boosts interest and sales? Is that money really that important or do you have morals? With our birding we aim to be as ethical as possible - what about with our associations of others?
SaxonBirder
PS I wouldn't get away with starting a private British500 drinkers club and publishing the details of people and how many different alcoholic malt and hop based beverages they've tried even if they were a member of not. Then logging their activities at every Real Ale Convention they've been too. In fact, the DPA wouldn't allow me to do such things without being registered and with the permission of others.
However, I felt the need to post on this one because I hate the damage it is doing to birding and ornithology. The public perception of birding and scientific studies is tarnished by the actions of a few in the public arena. The trouble is for me is also the moral and ethical aspects.
If people wish to go birding/twitching and keep lists then it is their own business what they get up to. It is their own business where they chose to publish their lists. In fact a list could be considered to be copyright (if published elsewhere) as it is a publication of an individual. You just give say Bubo/Surfbirds rights to publish it - but do you sell your rights for others to copy it? You can save a webpage for personal use (some organisations would like you not to be able to do this), but to republish that information? That is a whole different ball park. (Having been to yet another conference on Copyright, Designs and Patents Act!)
However, it is not the right of a private members club to log the activities of birders and publish it without their consent behind the scenes and also draw their own conclusions.
I gave up the listing because I just enjoy ornithology and frankly I prefer my own adventures with my wife and children and the peace and quiet! I saw the way things were turning with the competition and things said on a certain Channel 4 documentary a decade ago? Remember those comments about certain birders? I had the feeling of deja-vu last year watching BBC4.
If I want to go and live in a police state where my every move is scrutinised I'd move to one. Yes I know we are full of CCTV cameras and logging devices, but we have laws to protect what is a personal right. Some people have mentioned the DVLA - well that's a Government body and we elect them on a mandate. It is up to you to change this with your vote and MP. We don't elect individuals to spy on others with regard to their private hobbies. I am a Data Controller and a Freedom of Information Officer. I actually train others on both acts and the implications to their work. Some of the data I deal with is sensitive (in the fact it is exempt from the DPA). However, I still have to follow the principles of the act, we are registered and our organisation could be prosecuted accordingly if it didn't follow the DPA and FoI. The organisation I work for serves several million people.
As for the morality of this. Well you can see the stress it is causing some individuals in what they are posting. Now for me I can't understand those people who go out of their way to cause this the stress and anxiety. Nor those who back any private members club up that might be causing such action by refusing to follow the requests of members of the public (which they have a legal right to)
Stress can cause and exacerbate many conditions, including cancers and depression. I would ask what goes through the mind of people who wish to do this to others. In my opinion it is clear. A number of individuals have asked not to be associated with a private members club and yet they are being stalked and harassed in public in their opinion. In turn those who run private members clubs are protesting that people are standing up for their rights. Just like they do (or have recently done) in Egypt, Bahrain and Syria. Yet what do we think about those dictators who like to be judge, jury and executioner - yet continue to wield unelected power in those countries? Do we all agree that the situation in those countries is what we see as moral?
I would also ask the question of those organisations and the media about why you would wish to associate yourself with any private members club that is behaving in an unfriendly and potentially illegal manner? How does YOUR business wish to be seen? or don't you care and think the publicity just boosts interest and sales? Is that money really that important or do you have morals? With our birding we aim to be as ethical as possible - what about with our associations of others?
SaxonBirder
PS I wouldn't get away with starting a private British500 drinkers club and publishing the details of people and how many different alcoholic malt and hop based beverages they've tried even if they were a member of not. Then logging their activities at every Real Ale Convention they've been too. In fact, the DPA wouldn't allow me to do such things without being registered and with the permission of others.
Iceberg slim
Fly by night
Apologies if im reading this wrong,but will this not lead to the same requests,Except this time you have obtained the Data off a public domain,it just seems so confusing all this,thrust counter thrust stuff.
SaxonBirder
Active member
If you are holding data as a business or organisation or individual with the view to data analysis or publishing it - wherever you got that information from (even if it was the electoral roll) you still have to be registered with the DPA.
If it is for "personal interest" then no problem. As soon as you share or publish the personal information of others then consent has to be sought from the individual and you need to register.
The term given to this action is "Data Harvesting" - you'll find even a quick Google brings up Google as an offender.
I'd also query the copyright aspect of data harvesting.....now then it gets interesting......
Last edited:
Wow..just got a heads up on this thread Hello Birding friends! old and new
Like most of you reading this birding has been my life..I've done it to rebel.."upstarts are go"!, I've done it as a form of mediation.. "down on the forest floor with pittas" ..I've birded whilst high on hallucenogenics ..the '81 Nighthawk on "Scillycybin". I've met hundreds of likeminded people and travelled the globe with them in search of birds.
Even been lucky enough to make a living out of it and 30 years later am still strolling the uplands of britain seeking out raptors,waders and grouse. Lucky enough to take fellow birders abroad and share my eyes and ears still sharp after 50 years!
First twitched in '76, a Ross's Gull in Scarborough, and nearly forty years later have even managed two UK lifers so far this month despite having "fazed" many times, Still love seeing rare birds even after serving on the BBRC for ten years, despite being a name on the "advisory panel" of the UK 400 club!
I personally care less now about getting things "right" I care more about what I've seen rather than what I've missed. I've gone back to basics returning to birds and places I haven't been for 25 years. The world is still full of birds..despite the declines.. what a joy it was to hear a gropper at the back of the house on Monday night.
Most of us orbit in two world's..real life and birding..we get enough grief from the mortals we encounter in the former so ignore the crap on here and don't be put off.... go out and rediscover/discover birding
enjoy and whatever you do don't stay on here too long!
Like most of you reading this birding has been my life..I've done it to rebel.."upstarts are go"!, I've done it as a form of mediation.. "down on the forest floor with pittas" ..I've birded whilst high on hallucenogenics ..the '81 Nighthawk on "Scillycybin". I've met hundreds of likeminded people and travelled the globe with them in search of birds.
Even been lucky enough to make a living out of it and 30 years later am still strolling the uplands of britain seeking out raptors,waders and grouse. Lucky enough to take fellow birders abroad and share my eyes and ears still sharp after 50 years!
First twitched in '76, a Ross's Gull in Scarborough, and nearly forty years later have even managed two UK lifers so far this month despite having "fazed" many times, Still love seeing rare birds even after serving on the BBRC for ten years, despite being a name on the "advisory panel" of the UK 400 club!
I personally care less now about getting things "right" I care more about what I've seen rather than what I've missed. I've gone back to basics returning to birds and places I haven't been for 25 years. The world is still full of birds..despite the declines.. what a joy it was to hear a gropper at the back of the house on Monday night.
Most of us orbit in two world's..real life and birding..we get enough grief from the mortals we encounter in the former so ignore the crap on here and don't be put off.... go out and rediscover/discover birding
enjoy and whatever you do don't stay on here too long!
Jane Turner
Well-known member
That's a pity - I expect I'd score quite heavily..... and Iam in the UK500 bands club!
Johnny Allan
Dip or Glory
Actually I think it very well could be entirely made up, well at least the going to court aspect.....
Thank god for common sense. I ask readers to read my post 359 again and question everything you are being told in this matter. I personally know nothing about any court action.
Kind regards
Johnny Allan
Johnny Allan
Dip or Glory
Thanks for the clarification Paul, I was unaware of that. The other stuff is interesting too. Perhaps you and Bazza could get together and form a UK500 Club (only joking mate, BUBO is clearly the most sensible and fair way for people to publish lists if they wish so to do)
Right, back to birding
Kind regards
Johnny Allan
Right, back to birding
Kind regards
Johnny Allan
Jane Turner
Well-known member
A little unexpectedly I woke this morning to find my inbox full of PM's saying - it wasn't me Gov (taking this to court). Now with Johnny's confirmation, unless there is an additional and litigious aggrieved party, we may well be in the realms of fantasy.
Matt Prince
Sharkbait
British500 drinkers club ?
Seems a bit lacking in ambition to me - but I could do with someone to keep track of my list, I'm always forgetting what's been drunk
I'm year listing whisky - only got through 31 so far this year...
Seems a bit lacking in ambition to me - but I could do with someone to keep track of my list, I'm always forgetting what's been drunk
I'm year listing whisky - only got through 31 so far this year...
Jane Turner
Well-known member
British500 drinkers club ?
Seems a bit lacking in ambition to me - but I could do with someone to keep track of my list, I'm always forgetting what's been drunk
I'm year listing whisky - only got through 31 so far this year...
Do you accept all identifiable taxa.... port wood, 17yo etc, or just full species? This year I have mostly been drinking Jura superstition, having brought a largish quantity back from Jura! I've done all Islays on their breeding grounds in a weekend.
Paul Chapman
Well-known member
Johnny
Thanks for the invite - that's harsh even as a joke but it made me smile! As you know, I would not want to touch it with a bargepole! It was simply with the level of OCD that I have (evidenced by 25 years of twitching), I could not see the debate continue without at least setting out the context. I removed my list from BUBO because (quite simply) it is not about the numbers.
All the best
Paul Chapman
Thanks for the invite - that's harsh even as a joke but it made me smile! As you know, I would not want to touch it with a bargepole! It was simply with the level of OCD that I have (evidenced by 25 years of twitching), I could not see the debate continue without at least setting out the context. I removed my list from BUBO because (quite simply) it is not about the numbers.
All the best
Paul Chapman
Phil Carter
Well-known member
Been amused by comments in this thread about " tarnishing the public perception of birding". I would imagine that the public would still see birders as they always have, as a bunch of sad weirdos. And who could argue with them?
Phil
Phil
SaxonBirder
Active member
Jura was on offer in Tesco the other week. Other shops are available. I went round the distillery in Ballamory not long ago - they kept that one quiet on the series.
Regarding legal side of things. The ICO will take on the cases where they see that the DPA is being broken after they have requested someone to comply. It is not necessarily the individual. So once the complaint has been filed, if the ICO see that the complainants' requests are valid then often they will request politely for the changes to be made (and sometimes ask for evidence). If they discover they have been mislead or the actions they have requested have not taken place then they go for court action. You can launch your own court action if you wish to claim for damages, or the ICO will fine and the money goes into the Governments' coffers.
Much of their work goes on behind the scenes and you don't hear about it - just the major ones whom the media wishes to highlight!
My work policy is for the organisation to do everything in its power to protect data and the privacy of the individual - especially because we work with some of the most vulnerable people in society.
You can probably infer that I don't read or care for the gutter press or what "Jenny Taylor aged 23" thinks about issues on Page 3
James Thomas
Well-known member
Don't think Jenny Taylor is allowed on P3, just breasts I think.
- Status
