Protect your identities..
Moderators: Aladinsaneuk, MartDude, D-Rider, Moderators
-
Samray
- Double World Champion
- Posts: 6234
- Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 6:36 pm
- Location: Riding round with Sheene and Simoncelli
Just in case those without kids were feeling left out....
http://dofonline.co.uk/management/new-d ... y9284.html
The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency in Northern Ireland has admitted the loss of two discs containing details of over 6,000 drivers.
The information was being sent to the DLVA office in Swansea through Parcelforce in response to a safety recall by manufacturers. The agency said, however, that the discs contained details on 7,685 vehicles and more than 6,000 drivers.
The DVA added that the discs were not encrypted and did not contain personal details on the drivers. The data included the driver's name, address, registration mark of the vehicle, chassis number, make and colour.
; passed my test years ago and don't live in northern ireland i feel quite safe.. 
Since this all came to light, there's been countless other admissions of guilt and they reckon there'll be more come to light yet!
Seems Jezza Clarkson made the biggest cock up of the new year so far..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7174760.stm
I should be getting my new RSV thru soon then... anyone got a copy of that paper?
Seems Jezza Clarkson made the biggest cock up of the new year so far..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7174760.stm
Clarkson stung after bank prank
Jeremy Clarkson found himself unexpectedly donating to charity
TV presenter Jeremy Clarkson has lost money after publishing his bank details in his newspaper column.
The Top Gear host revealed his account numbers after rubbishing the furore over the loss of 25 million people's personal details on two computer discs.
He wanted to prove the story was a fuss about nothing.
But Clarkson admitted he was "wrong" after he discovered a reader had used the details to create a £500 direct debit to the charity Diabetes UK.
I was wrong and I have been punished
Clarkson published details of his Barclays account in the Sun newspaper, including his account number and sort code. He even told people how to find out his address.
"All you'll be able to do with them is put money into my account. Not take it out. Honestly, I've never known such a palaver about nothing," he told readers.
But he was proved wrong, as the 47-year-old wrote in his Sunday Times column.
"I opened my bank statement this morning to find out that someone has set up a direct debit which automatically takes £500 from my account," he said.
"The bank cannot find out who did this because of the Data Protection Act and they cannot stop it from happening again.
"I was wrong and I have been punished for my mistake."
Police were called in to search for the two discs, which contained the entire database of child benefit claimants and apparently got lost in the post in October 2007.
They were posted from HM Revenue and Customs offices in Tyne and Wear, but never turned up at their destination - the National Audit Office.
The loss, which led to an apology from Prime Minister Gordon Brown, created fears of identity fraud.
Clarkson now says of the case: "Contrary to what I said at the time, we must go after the idiots who lost the discs and stick cocktail sticks in their eyes until they beg for mercy."
I should be getting my new RSV thru soon then... anyone got a copy of that paper?
Dont understand the Clarkson thing. He was stung by a false direct debit in favour of a charity (ie he knows where the money has gone) and the Direct debit gttee makes it coomp[letely clear that his bank has to pay him back that dosh. they would do this by retreiving the money from where it has gone to. So how was he wrong? More to the point, why is he saying he was?
If you doubt what I'm saying, here is what BACS (who run the inter bank clearing system and therefore the direct debits) say on behalf of all UK banks "But if money were to be drawn from your account fraudulently you'd be protected by the Direct Debit Guarantee, and would be entitled to an immediate refund from your bank or building society."
If you doubt what I'm saying, here is what BACS (who run the inter bank clearing system and therefore the direct debits) say on behalf of all UK banks "But if money were to be drawn from your account fraudulently you'd be protected by the Direct Debit Guarantee, and would be entitled to an immediate refund from your bank or building society."
So how was he wrong? More to the point, why is he saying he was?
Posting your banking details and how to find out your address in a national newspaper tends to err on the wrong side of commonsense.
He said to the effect: 'yeah there's sod all wrong with your bank details being released into the public, it's all a storm in a teacup'
..then promptly got made to look an ass when what he said was proven to be incorrect.. by snaffling 500 quid a month from his account!Clarkson published details of his Barclays account in the Sun newspaper, including his account number and sort code. He even told people how to find out his address
So yes, He was wrong and yes he rightly apologised to the rest of the nation for his faux pass
Put it this way. I could easily set up a bank account online using completely false information (Egg savings account.. it's easy to do)
With his details I could bang in an order and get 2000 quid transferred to that account, snaffle the dosh and disappear off the face of the earth in... well, instantly!
Never ride faster than your guardian angel can fly
Well if you did that the guarantee makes it absolutely clear that he would get his money back. Quite right too, since the bank has paid his money out without any instruction from him to do so. Thats the whole point about the guarantee - the banks are paying out your money on the instruction of a third party they are assuming is honest, so they have to guarantee you the money back if they do it wrongly.
Its not a clever thing to post up your account no and sort code, but not because you are giving out the info (you do that every day and usually several times a day) but because you are challenging someone to do something about it. In this case the guy was clever enough to realise that if he took the money himself, he would have committed a crime, the money might well be recovered. But Clarkson would be covered by the bank. So instead he had the money sent to a charity and he has Clarkson by the shorts - he can hardly demand the money back from the charity can he?
Its not a clever thing to post up your account no and sort code, but not because you are giving out the info (you do that every day and usually several times a day) but because you are challenging someone to do something about it. In this case the guy was clever enough to realise that if he took the money himself, he would have committed a crime, the money might well be recovered. But Clarkson would be covered by the bank. So instead he had the money sent to a charity and he has Clarkson by the shorts - he can hardly demand the money back from the charity can he?
