Information Commissioner's Office Bewertungen 498

Useless better to get a solicitor to deal with it they take years to review a case unsure why they exist

I made a submission to the ICO on 28 October 2024 using the online form, but was completely ignored. All I received from the ICO was a standard auto-response, no case reference number or case officer allocated. This was despite it stating it should take around/up to 14 weeks to investigate. Despite a follow-up on 4 Dec 2024 and an email request for an update on 3 March 2025, I heard nothing.

As a former government officer myself, I find it very disconcerting that a member of the public can be disregarded by the ICO in this way. Surely it is courteous to provide some sort of reply, even if the answer is that they cannot investigate.

I had to resort to completing a form GRC3 from the HM Courts & Tribunals website. This was entitled "Apply for an order to progress a complaint made to the Information Commissioner." This was well worth doing, as after I submitted this on 2 April 2025, I received a response from the ICO (at long last!) just two weeks later.

There was no apology for ignoring my submission though, despite the auto-response in October stating "We understand issues related to your personal information can cause distress and difficulty and will action your complaint as soon as possible." People may have already been subjected to stress and anxiety before contacting the ICO and requesting help, but getting no response from the ICO can add to stress levels.

Although the ICO would not take any further action (although I was advised to contact them by a lawyer), that is not the point. My main concern is the fact that I was ignored and had to contact HM Courts & Tribunals and complete a form GRC3 to get any response at all. I have to say the HM Courts & Tribunals service was very efficient in my case.

I spoke to a young girl on the helpline, when I asked what measures they can take against an organisation for a data breach, she repeatedly side stepped my question. Reading the reviews here, I guess the answer is NOTHING.

All these quango's are designed to give the illusion of consumer protection. In reality they exist to waste our time, cause life limiting stress, and solve nothing. They invent new ways to make money and the entire public sector is a self serving bloated waste of space.

I would say opt for the legal route, but that is equally precarious, long winded, full of jargon and expensive. What is the point of laws if only the rich can afford to enforce them? It means the law is another a weapon of oppression.

In many countries the corruption is open. In Britain it's hidden behind illusions. If companies pay the ICO a fee, and the ICO always takes their side against consumers, it's nothing more than white washed bribery. British bureacrats are master manipulators who make things look good on paper. But the public has always been shafted. We the public are being played, we have no rights in practise.

absolute joke of an organisation , unless its a high profile case with lots of media attention you are wasting your time , following a housing ombudsman report that clearly is inaccurate and contains defamotory inaccurate statements that relate to me I provide the the HO with irrefutable evidence a number of their statements within their report were inaccurate and I had the right to rectification under GDPR , the HO refused to alter their report and I made a subsquent complaint to the ICO , I provided a huge amount of evidence including a 3rd Party organisation statement / email that demonstrated beyond doubt the HO report was inaccurate and still the best I could get from the ICO was an acknowledgement that " i may disagree with their view " and a suggestion that I make a complaint to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO), Via my local MP , Really ! As with the HO the ICO clearly will not acknowledge any evidence that will demonstrate any decisions made by their staff are incorrect . due to this individuals like ourselves have continuous uphill battles with public sector workers ( that we pay for out of our taxes ) who have no concerns relating to possible redress regarding their decisions . to reiterate unless its a high profile case with media attention in my experience the ICO is not fit for purpose ,this also appears to be a constant with Ombudsman . dont waste your time .

I do not see any justification for this organisation to exist and waste taxpayers money. Their response time is over 6 months now, vague and unhelpful.

1 star as minus dont exsist. please add the minus stars @trustpilot Claim to regulate to data sector yet most of them couldnt wipe their noses as they are to busy looking for excuses to end calls. They have no idea on how to regulate this sector but that goes for all regulators with the exception of OFCOM. THEY HAVE NOW VERY LIKELY COST ME A COURT CASE AND WITH DAMAGES OF OVER £15,000 WITH THEIR NEGLECT TO THEIR PAYED WORKLOAD ! They abuse your rights and expect you to turn up smiling with a nice bottle of wine and bunch of flowers. Their phone staff should be working for the gestapo or down with the penguins where they cant melt and then have extremely negative impacts on innocent peoples lives !

PLEASE FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY WHEN RINGING THIS PLACE HAVE THE CALL RECORDED FROM YOUR END AS THEY STOPPED CALL RECORDING PROBABLY TO PROTECT THEMSELVES AND THE SHAMBOLIC SERVICE THEY PROVIDE !

Bring Back The Romans fgs

Appalling. The ICO is not a patch on what it once was, and like most other regulatory organisations now consistently always sucks up to the will of corporate business regardless of all wrongdoing and illegal spying on private citizens in the UK. My family were illegally spied on by building contractors in Bedwell Stevenage for over 9 months and lots of legitimate evidence was given to the ICO but alas even though many m neighbours were illegally spied on and the movement of vulnerable families monitored illegally the ICO now in ignorance pretend this is OK which clearly it is not. In Starmer's Britain everything has become broken!

A complete and utter waste of time. They take 4 to 6 months to actually review any case submitted. When they do, they just find in favour of the firm you are complaining against, without any research, investigation or discussion.
No reason for this waste of space organisation to exist.

I have had the best experience with the ladies at the ICO. I called to explain that I didn't know that we needed to register, Caroline was amazing, she kindly reassured me that it was all ok and I could speak to someone to sign us up. I then spoke to Janet, who was also great, she explained it would be quicker to reiter online as i needed the document switly. I made the mistake in opting for the direct debit and that would have delayed our registration until the end of the month, but a quick call to Mel managed to help me register right away and she was just as helpful as the other ladies. Thank you

I received an email stating my personal information had been lost by a company I was applying to work for. 3 weeks of emailing and I was told that I’m imagining that my data was lost and misused. I took it to the information commissioners office and sent them 5 separate email chains where the company said it had lost my information. I sent them screenshots of where the company said my information was and it wasn’t there. I lost my case as the company said I made it all up as I was rejected for a job position. The company then rejected my application after this point and I received an email to notify me of this. The information commissioners office sided with the company and said that if we ignore the emails then there is no proof that the information was lost and therefore you are just unhappy you were rejected. I said wait I wasn’t rejected though until this date. They did a second review and I lost again as the company said it sent the email 2 months earlier than it was dated and the company provided a piece of paper with the writing “assessed April 17th 10.52am” no other information provided and that apparently was more valid that time stamped emails which showed the opposite.

Literally written emails are not enough evidence.

The company then illegally Shared my details and harassed me outside of work with threatening phone calls and emails and the Ico said that there is proof that the company misused my details and they will tell the company not to do it again but their is no need to punish them as they know it was wrong

Literally no point in wasting your time with them as they aren’t interested in looking at the evidence and will find anyway to side with the company

This company exists because of laws that are not meant to be broken but doesn't act or care.

CCTV cameras facing into our property and boundaries. They say it's not allowed and write a standard letter to the people harassing us with CCTV which mentions at the end that if they don't comply they won't act further. What is the point. Just a waste of a company.

The met police are refusing to send me data I requested and they do nothing. They tell them to act and when they don't they say they are within their rights.

This job must be the easiest in the world.
You tell an organisation to do right and if they don't they step away.

The 1 star reviews says it all.

I think the ICO is not fit for purpose, they simply do not care when you report an organisation for serious GDPR breaches. Seems to me like they are an organisation in place to collect fees from organisations and not have a care in the world. I am absolutely disgusted in the ICO for they way they have handled my previous complaint about an education provider sharing student details to tutors personal emails and the arrogance in their responses.

I have had two complaints filed with the ICO and disappointed with both outcomes. I wish I could give zero stars to the ICO like so many, as they are not worth a penny of the taxes they are being paid with.

This is supposed to be a regulator whose job is to hold companies accountable to GDPR and PECR standards under the eyes of the law and ensure the protection of individuals’ data rights. Yet, my experience shows they do not hold companies to account at all. If anything, they undermine and discourage your legal rights to be enforced.

Despite providing detailed evidence of multiple breaches of GDPR (in total 34 breaches) by a major bank and a DCA—including failures to issue transparency notices, erasure of data confirmation where it applied, mishandling/ignoring of Subject Access Requests (SARs), and outright refusal to provide essential information—the ICO has merely issued polite reminders to the bank and zero attempt to look at the DCA (Debt Collecting Agency). No enforcement and certainly no proper protection of my rights as a data subject.

I expected the ICO to step in and demand compliance and accountability from both companies that ignore GDPR as is their Regulatory purpose. Instead, they’ve given the company's more time and leniency than legally necessary, essentially letting the issues slide, leaving me to navigate this exhausting and stressful process on my own.

For an organisation tasked with enforcing data protection law, they’ve shown little regard for fairness or justice. If the roles were reversed and I breached GDPR as a business or Individual, I have no doubt the law would have been used to come down on me. But because these are large organisations, the ICO seems to apply a different, more lenient standard and expects the Individual to take lead from them.

I am deeply disappointed in their failure to provide any meaningful resolution or enforcement. They have failed me as an individual twice and I will not waste my time with them again. They have proven to not waste taxpayers money and do not fulfil their role as a regulator. Therefore, my experience is no different than that of the vast majority here.

I have just encountered the most awful customer service person who rang to assist with a complaint I made. I am shaking here.

This matter related to the ICO website payment function being down at some point in late January/ early February after the renewal email and letter arrived, such that they were not accepting payments for annual fees. There was a clear note on the website saying it was closed to payments at that time.

My subs were due by 23 February so having tried to pay on-line without success, I made a diary note to try again the week before the deadline. On logging on that day, low and behold, the fee had jumped to £52! A 30%+ increase.

I recognise fees are set by Government, but had the system been working when I first tried to pay, I would have been able to pay £40, not £52.

As a semi retired, older person on a lowish income, I questioned the need to pay this £12 increase first via the on-line chat, and secondly via an emailed complaint on the advice of David within the 'chat' function. I felt I was being penalised by the failure of ICO's systems.

Having emailed to explain the problem and requesting a £12 refund for the difference, I have just received a phone call from the most obnoxious man who seemed 'up for a fight' from the get-go. He was so loud and kept talking over me, he continued to raise his voice, he refused to listen to me, and he ostensibly accused me of lying about the website payment function being down when I said it had. He argued that it was only down on 15th and 16th February which is categorically untrue. How dare he question my integrity!

As my stress levels began to grow, and I could feel my heart pounding in my chest, in the end I had to tell him that I did not like his tone or that he was not listening, and he just carried on raising his voice and shouting over me. He continued to go at me, even when I saying I would be ending the call.

I cannot believe that you have people like this telephoning customers to assist with complaints and concerns. It is absolutely outrageous. What sort of an organisation are you?!

If I had a choice to go elsewhere I absolutely would. Unfortunately, I have no choice. This individual needs to go back to customer-care school for retraining. He should not be allowed anywhere near a customer until he has learnt the basics.

Excuses after excuses, no wonder councils are not really bothered if you use the ICO.
Just another quango department that's NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE.
Fortunately/unfortunately I have the option to submit an accident claim, possibly using the courts.
I copied my MP on the ridiculous excuse received on 2 separate occasions, first case officer closed the case without looking at the available evidence.
Don't waste your time

As other reviewer's have mentioned, this organisation is wilfully useless.

I was attacked by a neighbour, and then threatened by their police officer neighbour "coming round to sort me out". They then attacked me again, and a police officer did in fact come to my house and threaten me, as promised.

When I reported this to the police force concerned, without even bothering to find out who I was, or anything about the incident, the first officer I spoke to immediately informed me "Oh no, no officer would risk their job doing that!", and instantly dismissed my claim.

I was met with sexism, prejudice and derision throughout, and eventually made a formal complaint, all whilst being harassed and threatened by my neighbours. The police "professional standards department", who were neither professional, nor had any standards, sent me an almost threatening email during my complaint, which stated that they "had a copy of the body worn video by the police officer who had visited my house, and could watch it at any time."

I responded to this email, stating that they should be watching the body worn evidence, and should have watched it already, given that they were meant to be investigating this officer, and his actions when he visited me, and since they had repeatedly written to me stating that they were "thoroughly investigating my complaint", so what exactly were they doing otherwise.

I then put in a formal request for a copy of the body worn video evidence, and waited the standard 30 days for it to arrive.

Surprise surprise, after 30 days, no video was forthcoming. Months later, no video was forthcoming. When I queried this, I eventually received an email from the police force stating that no such video existed, the same police force that had emailed me months earlier stating that they "had a copy of the body worn video by the police officer who had visited my house, and could watch it at any time."

As per the law, I then made a complaint via the ICO, since the police force concerned had not sent me a copy of the video evidence as requested, and that video evidence had quite clearly existed, by their own admission, when I had requested it.

The police force concerned then proceeded to totally ignore the ICO for months and months, I think this went on for over a year at least in the end.

Eventually, the police force concerned replied to the ICO, and claimed that the police officer, and I quote "must have pressed delete instead of upload, and the video was never uploaded, so had never existed in their systems", completely contradicting their own email, which had been sent months after the video would have been uploaded.

The police force then proceeded to once again totally ignore the ICO, and basically do whatever they wanted. The ICO wrote to me and said that they could not keep pursuing the police, because the police were just ignoring them.

Really? So a police force just delete body worn video evidence of their officers going to people's homes and threatening them, and even send them emails stating that they "had a copy of the body worn video by the police officer who had visited my house, and could watch it at any time," proving that the video had in fact existed. It only ceased to exist when I requested a copy of it.

There is literally no purpose to this organisation. They clearly have no power, and any little they do they are not interested in using, and do not pursue the people they are meant to pursue. Which is exactly why the people breaking the law break it, since they know this organisation will not bother to pursue them. In my case this meant my continuing to have to live in fear for years, and having my pets immediately poisoned after I had dared to report these people to the ICO, and the ICO simply let them get away with it. I personally consider this negligence. Allowing this patently obvious abuse of position and power, instead of pursuing it, when the police had changed their story, and this was provable demonstrable fact, put me at risk, and I had to suffer the consequences. This is not okay.

Completely pointless. Horrific track record. Don’t waste your time. Get yourself legal advice instead.

Shockingly bad. Not fit for purpose.
A waste of time!! This is the overall aim of the ICO. Any decisions made by the ICO about an organisation are used to inform our own regulatory work.

My review took one year and 6 months.
The reviewing supervisor stated in a review of the case worker's work that nothing was wrong with that.
HERE IS COPY OF THE SUMMARY:
Unfortunately, we don’t guarantee to resolve matters to an individual’s satisfaction. Assessments we make are opinions rather than legally binding decisions or judgements. Definitive decisions about an individual’s rights can ultimately only be reached through the legal system which you have the right to take up independently of the ICO. A rather than being used to enforce an individual’s rights or evidence their own opinion.

They seem very busy

This company is a disgraceful waste of money that legally forces people to pay what they call a “data protection fee” even though they are not privy to or instrumental in any company data protection systems. Their fee can go as high as £2000 per year and the company receives no benefit whatsoever from these leeches.