Jump to content

UK charities fined for data misuse


David

Recommended Posts

Eleven charities have been fined by the UK's data watchdog for misusing information about millions of past donors to seek further funds.

Those fined include Oxfam, Cancer Research UK, The Royal British Legion and Battersea Dogs' and Cats' Home.

The Information Commissioner's Office said offences included secretly piecing together data from various sources and trading personal details to target new and lapsed donors.

It said charities must obey the law.

But it limited the individual fines to between £6,000 and £18,000 because donors could be unhappy at more punitive fines.

"[People] will be upset to learn the way their personal information has been analysed and shared by charities they trusted with their details and their donations," said Information Commissioner Elizabeth Denham.

"No charity wants to alienate their donors."

Wealth screening

The regulator said that some of the charities had hired companies to profile the wealth of their donors. It said this was done by investigating their incomes, lifestyles, property values and friendship circles among other means. 

In some cases, the "wealth screening" process was also used to flag those most likely to be convinced to leave money in their wills.

Some charities are also accused of tracking down additional data about past supporters - for example using old telephone numbers to identify current ones. This ignores the fact people have the right to choose what information they share.

In addition, some of the charities shared data with each other without seeking permission. 

"Supporters of animal charities could have their information shared with homeless, humanitarian or religious charities even though the supporters only expected their information to be shared with other animal charities," the Information Commissioner's Office said.

"Some charities don't know if the information has been shared one or 100 times. This can result in lots of unwanted charity marketing."

Follow-up fines

The Information Commissioner's Office carried out the probe after reports that charity supporters were being pressured into follow-up donations.

Last December, the British Heart Foundation and The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals were fined for similar activity.

The full list of charities affected by the latest penalties is:

The International Fund for Animal Welfare - £18,000

Cancer Support UK - £16,000

Cancer Research UK - £16,000

The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association - £15,000

Macmillan Cancer Support - £14,000

The Royal British Legion - £12,000

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children - £12,000

Great Ormond Street Hospital Children's Charity - £11,000

WWF-UK - £9,000

Battersea Dogs' and Cats' Home - £9,000

Oxfam - £6,000

The Charity Commission for England and Wales - another regulator - said it was now investigatingwhether follow-on action needed to be taken against individual trustees.

"The generous British public expect charities to safeguard their data and raise funds responsibly, and in return they donate in their millions," said the commission's chief operating officer David Holdsworth.

"Sadly in these cases charities have not kept their side of the bargain. 

"We are working with the charities concerned, the Information Commissioner and the Fundraising Regulator to ensure that any necessary remedial action is taken."

You might think that fining charities for being a bit too eager to solicit donations is rather unfair. But make no mistake, the kind of offences that the Information Commissioner uncovered are seen by the regulator as very serious breaches of the Data Protection Act.

They would have probably meant far more serious penalties for commercial organisations.

Piecing together information from other sources not provided by donors, ranking people according to their wealth, and in a couple of cases trading data with other charities all meant that millions might have received marketing approaches they did not expect or want.

One of those fined, the NSPCC, said it was disappointed by what it regards as an unjustified punishment.

But the Information Commissioner hopes that charities will now be aware that they have to be just as careful with personal data as any business.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39502258?ocid=socialflow_twitter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 21
  • Created
  • Last Reply
49 minutes ago, Animal is a Ram said:

It's a shame that the work the charities do is impacted by a decision made by those at the upper reaches of the hierarchy.

It should be made to come out of the pay packets of those who made the decisions.

Quite a few who are earning six figure salaries. It really makes me angry when I see adverts saying 'donate £3 a month and restore someone's sight in Africa' or '£5 a month will supply a whole village with fresh water for a week' then to find that the CEO of the said charity is taking £250k a year as a salary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Wolfie20 said:

Quite a few who are earning six figure salaries. It really makes me angry when I see adverts saying 'donate £3 a month and restore someone's sight in Africa' or '£5 a month will supply a whole village with fresh water for a week' then to find that the CEO of the said charity is taking £250k a year as a salary.

My point exactly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Wolfie20 said:

Quite a few who are earning six figure salaries. It really makes me angry when I see adverts saying 'donate £3 a month and restore someone's sight in Africa' or '£5 a month will supply a whole village with fresh water for a week' then to find that the CEO of the said charity is taking £250k a year as a salary.

I take it you don't watch Comic Relief on TV with all those skint celebrities, me neither.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do something every year for charity but only ever donate direct to the hospitals themselves for exactly the reason @David has highlighted.

Sheffields Children Hospital has its own charity so we go straight to them.

I'm fairly sure Derby is the same,we will look to donate to them this year.

These stats really upset me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never give to charities. Especially after hearing most of their money raised in a lot of cases only around 2%-10% actually go to the cause! My missus just shuts the door on them maybe I should learn from her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only that, but a lot of organisations adopt charity status for the tax breaks. It's quite easy to set up as a charity

My old neighbours used to run a church (registered as a charity) from their house! All they had to do was say they "worked in the community".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sith Happens

I donate to charity sometimes, i also have raised money for charities too.

the annoyance i have is charities constantly shoved in your face, pride park on a match day is a good example, there are always people there collecting.

Ok, i dont have a problem with that, its them shaking their buckets at you and purposly standing in your way asking for donations. If i want to donate i will but dont try and pressure me into it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saido Berahino's foundation failed to pass on funds raised at a 2015 event for WaterAid, the charity claims.

WaterAid says it "has not received any money" from a dinner the Stoke City striker hosted in Mayfair in May 2015.

The Charity Commission is "deciding if there are regulatory issues to assess".

The new agent of ex-West Brom striker Berahino declined to comment. However, BBC Sport understands the dealings with WaterAid were arranged by the 23-year-old's previous representatives.

"WaterAid was approached by the Saido Berahino Foundation in February 2015 regarding a dinner to raise funds for the foundation," a statement from the charity read.

"The event was not managed or paid for by WaterAid, and attendance was by invitation only.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39510588

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎05‎/‎04‎/‎2017 at 12:57, Mostyn6 said:

it's that salary which demands the greed and tactics of underhanded people to claw in money.

CEOs of charities still have targets.

So true Mostyn. I really don't mind CEO's of businesses getting huge wedges .. that is between them and their shareholders and we have a right not to buy from them. ...

Charities and to a certain extent near monopoly public utilities need to be governed by a different set of rules. By that I mean ethics, decency and all those things that drive fair play before bean counting. I'd start with some sort of statute that no charity can pay its senior staff more than £ X per year. it would be in the rules of charitable status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, jono said:

So true Mostyn. I really don't mind CEO's of businesses getting huge wedges .. that is between them and their shareholders and we have a right not to buy from them. ...

Charities and to a certain extent near monopoly public utilities need to be governed by a different set of rules. By that I mean ethics, decency and all those things that drive fair play before bean counting. I'd start with some sort of statute that no charity can pay its senior staff more than £ X per year. it would be in the rules of charitable status.

that job you offered me, i'll give it a miss :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LesterRam said:

that job you offered me, i'll give it a miss :ph34r:

That's ok mate. We're a charity. It's a bit like being a purist designer. There are just some things you have to do in a certain way. It might be cheaper, more efficient or better in some ways, but if it doesn't look right then you don't do it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 05/04/2017 at 11:48, David said:

 

The full list of charities affected by the latest penalties is:

The International Fund for Animal Welfare - £18,000

Cancer Support UK - £16,000

Cancer Research UK - £16,000

The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association - £15,000

Macmillan Cancer Support - £14,000

The Royal British Legion - £12,000

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children - £12,000

Great Ormond Street Hospital Children's Charity - £11,000

WWF-UK - £9,000

Battersea Dogs' and Cats' Home - £9,000

Oxfam - £6,000

 

I hope all the fine money is given back to charity somehow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I work for a charity.

It operates  exclusively in Derbyshire and turns over around £150,000 per year. In total, for staff, overheads, service delivery. We are really quite efficient and very frugal!

When you read all this stuff about charities in the media it is almost always about large national or international charities with multimillion pound turnovers that are run more as businesses.

If you aren't sure about the collections at Pride Park ask if the charity is local. Sight Support Derbyshire were there last week - they do a great job and are very worth a donation. 

Please don't make blanket assumptions about charities as most do great work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...