Discussing Private Matters

Shane-KornSpace

Hi.
Recently I ran in to some trouble regarding the payments of my Meteor phone bill. I wasn't able to pay the last couple of months unfortunately.
Anyway. Yesterday I got a call from my mother who asked me
"do you owe Meteor €xxx???".
She told me that Meteor called the house phone and asked her about it.
Now, this is what's bugging me.
I am a 23 year old adult living away from home, but my Meteor account is still registered at my mother's address.
Were they allowed to discuss this information with my mother? Is that not a breach of confidentiality?
Could they not have simply requested her to tell me they called asking for me?

Do I have a leg to stand on to complain about this phone call my mother got? After all, the money I owe has nothing to do with her and as far as Im concerned, should never have been discussed with her.
If I call UPC for example about my mother's bill, they are not going to discuss it with me unless I have permission from my Mother.

Thanks!

Melendez

This post has been deleted.

Cabaal

When they called your address on your account they should have verified account details before discussing anything.

Now if for example your a man and when they called a man answered the phone and was able to answer your security details then Meteor have acted in good faith, if however your a man and they called and spoke to say your mother then clearly there is an issue here.

If they did indeed speak to your mother thats a breach of DPA, such calls are recorded and I for one would be mighty pissed off if it happened to me.

I'd expect at the least an apology and something as a goodwill gesture along with assurances that your account is secure in future, written ideally.

Shane-KornSpace

THanks for the responses. I have contacted the Data Commisioner about my issue and I will see what their take on it is.
I am a man and they did indeed speak to my mother as my dad does not live in the house with her.
My mother would not be able to confirm my security details as she does not know the PIN number they always ask for.
And yes Cabaal. I am highly pissed off about this. My financial difficulties are my business. Not my mothers. I do not want her worrying. I spent 20 minutes on the phone to her last night trying to re-assure her that everything is fine.

Zab

Cabaal wrote: »

When they called your address on your account they should have verified account details before discussing anything.

Now if for example your a man and when they called a man answered the phone and was able to answer your security details then Meteor have acted in good faith, if however your a man and they called and spoke to say your mother then clearly there is an issue here.

You're assuming that the person they phoned lied about their identity and said they were OP, regardless of what sex they were. This seems unlikely in OP's situation.

I'd be annoyed.

djk1000

I remember working in retail years ago, we were warned that if a customers credit card/debit card was declined that we could not say this to the customer if anyone else was in earshot, as people had taken and won defamation claims before. We had to show the customer the declined slip so no one else could see.

So bit of a stretch, but Meteor may have defamed you (a little bit) by implying to a third party that you are in financial difficulty. Raise hell about that and Meteor might be more inclined to do something for you to make up for it.

Cabaal

Zab wrote: »

You're assuming that the person they phoned lied about their identity and said they were OP, regardless of what sex they were. This seems unlikely in OP's situation.

Indeed, I should have stated that, my above comment is based on the assumption that the person they spoke to claims to be the account holder and knows all the account security questions etc

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

djk1000 wrote: »

I remember working in retail years ago, we were warned that if a customers credit card/debit card was declined that we could not say this to the customer if anyone else was in earshot, as people had taken and won defamation claims before. We had to show the customer the declined slip so no one else could see.

So bit of a stretch, but Meteor may have defamed you (a little bit) by implying to a third party that you are in financial difficulty. Raise hell about that and Meteor might be more inclined to do something for you to make up for it.

The defamation angle is just a step too far. Stick with the breach of Data Protection legislation. No defamation if they are owed money and no defamation as the OP stated it here anyway. Always best to go with the facts instead of trying to bump something up to more than it is. Sensationalising something just demeans it - a bit Joe Duffyish.

Shane-KornSpace

I was talking to Meteor customer care a few minutes ago.
he explained how they take data protection very seriously.

I realise this guy I was speaking to doesn't have much say on what will we be done so he has arranged a supervisor to call me and I'll see where it goes from there.

dub45

Shane-KornSpace wrote: »

I was talking to Meteor customer care a few minutes ago.
he explained how they take data protection very seriously.

I realise this guy I was speaking to doesn't have much say on what will we be done so he has arranged a supervisor to call me and I'll see where it goes from there.

Meteor do indeed take data protection very seriously!

http://irishexaminer.com/ireland/eircom-apologises-for-loss-of-customer-data-183456.html

It is standard practise for any utility company I have dealt with recently to ask the simple question "am I talking to the account holder?" Its not actually that hard is it?

drunkmonkey

Have you paid what you owe them yet?, i'd advise doing that before going down any route about them having a word with your mum.

If your running up bad debts with your Mothers address I say she has every right to know what's going on.

dub45

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Have you paid what you owe them yet?, i'd advise doing that before going down any route about them having a word with your mum.

If your running up bad debts with your Mothers address I say she has every right to know what's going on.

Firstly your comment is totally out of order. The op's domestic affairs are of no concern to you or anyone else here.

The op posted for advice on a particular problem not for a lecture from an over anxious to interfere busy body.

And if a person does owe a company money it does not entitle them to breach that person's privacy.

drunkmonkey

dub45 wrote: »

Firstly your comment is totally out of order. The op's domestic affairs are of no concern to you or anyone else here.

And if a person does owe a company money it does not entitle them to breach that person's privacy.

Point taken, it does't matter if the amount outstanding is paid yet. It's nothing to do with OP's original question.

If someone was running up debts using your address do you not think your entitled to know as the home owner as this kind of thing does effect credit decisions. On Eircom's books op's mams address will have risk attached to it which will effect everyone at that address trying to do business with the company.

OP is old enough to be independent, then there old enough to change the address on their account to where their actually living. They should have also made contact with Meteor rather than Meteor having to go chase them.

dub45

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Point taken, it does't matter if the amount outstanding is paid yet. It's nothing to do with OP's original question.

If someone was running up debts using your address do you not think your entitled to know as the home owner as this kind of thing does effect credit decisions. On Eircom's books op's mams address will have risk attached to it which will effect everyone at that address trying to do business with the company.

OP is old enough to be independent, there old enough to change the address on their account to where their actually living. They should have also made contact with Meteor rather than Meteor having to go chase them.

This has nothing got to do with you - you or anyone else know nothing about the op's personal situation. Mind your own business until you are asked for the benefit of your 'wisdom'.

drunkmonkey

dub45 wrote: »

This has nothing got to do with you - you or anyone else know nothing about the op's personal situation. Mind your own business until you are asked for the benefit of your 'wisdom'.

This is a public forum and op put the matter up for discussion. If someone has seen this story before and knows the implications of it, their input should be taken on board without having someone else telling them to shut up, shame on you.

OP's not being fair to his mum or anyone else at that address. As a homeowner I think she's entitled to know if someone is using her address to gain credit and then defaulting.
Whether it was legal for Meteor to tell the homeowners who's good standing is at risk is the question.

dub45

drunkmonkey wrote: »

This is a public forum and op put the matter up for discussion. If someone has seen this story before and knows the implications of it, their input should be taken on board without having someone else telling them to shut up, shame on you.

The matter which the op put up for discussion was Meteor's behaviour.

The shame is on you for being an interfering busy body.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

OP's not being fair to his mum or anyone else at that address. As a homeowner I think she's entitled to know if someone is using her address to gain credit and then defaulting.
Whether it was legal for Meteor to tell the homeowners who's good standing is at risk is the question.

You are entitled to think whatever you like. If the op wants advise on their personal circumstances then it is up to them to ask it.

You know nothing about their personal circumstances mind your own business.

Onthe3rdDay

drunkmonkey wrote: »

This is a public forum and op put the matter up for discussion. If someone has seen this story before and knows the implications of it, their input should be taken on board without having someone else telling them to shut up, shame on you.

OP's not being fair to his mum or anyone else at that address. As a homeowner I think she's entitled to know if someone is using her address to gain credit and then defaulting.
Whether it was legal for Meteor to tell the homeowners who's good standing is at risk is the question.

Credit reports don't work like that in Ireland. People are supposed to be rated individually. It could have an effect on The eircom group of companies but not on anyone else.

In Britain someone carrying a bad debt can affect others living at the same postcode, so not only the address of the house but perhaps the whole street. But that's not an issue here. I think we gained our independence sometime in the early 1920's!

drunkmonkey

dub45 wrote: »

The matter which the op put up for discussion was Meteor's behaviour.

The shame is on you for being an interfering busy body.

You are entitled to think whatever you like. If the op wants advise on their personal circumstances then it is up to them to ask it.

You know nothing about their personal circumstances mind your own business.

Meteor's behavior is up for discussion but you seem to missing the related side story by a country mile.
I could be reading this wrong as i'm only making assumptions like everyone else thats posted but I believe OP is looking for an angle (I don't have any problem with that).
He could be in a good place if Meteor were wrong as he may forget about the data breach if Meteor forget about the bill. (That's why I asked whether the bill has not been paid as it has a bearing on what his objective is in this case).

I never claimed to know anything about OP's personal circumstances besides what has been stated here, I don't know where you are reading that from.

Name calling is a bit petty and should be above mods, shame on you again. Have you been drinking as you seem to be reading things that haven't been said and making demands above your station.

drunkmonkey

Onthe3rdDay wrote: »

In Britain someone carrying a bad debt can affect others living at the same postcode, so not only the address of the house but perhaps the whole street. But that's not an issue here.

I know what your saying about the postcodes in the UK but here they just class the whole area as risky. So op's actions at number 34 could have a knock on effect at number 35. One default wouldn't cause a problem but if number 1,7,11,22,26 all done the same the place would have a bad reputation.

CrackisWhack

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Meteor's behavior is up for discussion but you seem to missing the related side story by a country mile.
I could be reading this wrong as i'm only making assumptions like everyone else thats posted but I believe OP is looking for an angle (I don't have any problem with that).
He could be in a good place if Meteor were wrong as he may forget about the data breach if Meteor forget about the bill. (That's why I asked whether the bill has not been paid as it has a bearing on what his objective is in this case).

I never claimed to know anything about OP's personal circumstances besides what has been stated here, I don't know where you are reading that from.

Name calling is a bit petty and should be above mods, shame on you again. Have you been drinking as you seem to be reading things that haven't been said and making demands above your station.

I get the impression you are one of these people who likes to argument a point, just for the sake of it!

The bottom line is the OP is asking if Meteor should be allowed to contact his mother with regards to his phone bill. To which in my knowledge they can not, it's quite suprising actually that they did this, you should make a complaint OP, it is a violation of the data protection act.

dub45

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Meteor's behavior is up for discussion but you seem to missing the related side story by a country mile.
I could be reading this wrong as i'm only making assumptions like everyone else thats posted but I believe OP is looking for an angle (I don't have any problem with that).

Meteor's behaviour is the point of the thread.

There is no related story.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

He could be in a good place if Meteor were wrong as he may forget about the data breach if Meteor forget about the bill. (That's why I asked whether the bill has not been paid as it has a bearing on what his objective is in this case).

I never claimed to know anything about OP's personal circumstances besides what has been stated here, I don't know where you are reading that from.

Name calling is a bit petty and should be above mods, shame on you again. Have you been drinking as you seem to be reading things that haven't been said and making demands above your station.

There is no suggestion anywhere in the op's post that they are looking for any angle.

My point in referring to the op's personal circumstances is that anyone could be in a difficult situation with all sorts of pressures going on - they should be able to post on boards where they require specific help or information without fear of irrelevant lectures from people with hunches or baseless beliefs about their motives.

And "interfering busy body" in this case is not a name its a fact which you confirm with every post!

drunkmonkey

CrackisWhack wrote: »

I get the impression you are one of these people who likes to argument a point, just for the sake of it!

The bottom line is the OP is asking if Meteor should be allowed to contact his mother with regards to his phone bill. To which in my knowledge they can not, it's quite suprising actually that they did this, you should make a complaint OP, it is a violation of the data protection act.

You've just made an assumption as well, What point am I arguing? What point are you arguing? Just was giving my 2cent like everyone else. (Welcome to the thread by the way )

I was curious to know if the bill was paid as it wasn't when the thread was started but op is now in contact with meteor.

When OP made a contract, he used his home address and landline number on the application. That's the number which was contacted.

We don't have the transcript of the call yet to confirm the data breach but going on the facts not much account if any account details were revealed.

Is it a data breach to call someone at their registered address and registered landline when calls to their mobile number have failed? (No)

Is it ok for meteor to ask how can they contact op as every other method has failed? (Yes)

Is it ok for op's mum to ask what this is all about? (Yes)

Is it ok for meteor to say it's in relation to his account? (Yes)

Op's Mum did not know if OP owed money that's why she asked him so Meteor didn't discuss op's account beyond what could be considered a data breach.

There's no data brach here.

drunkmonkey

dub45 wrote: »

And "interfering busy body" in this case is not a name its a fact which you confirm with every post!

I've no interest in going tit for tat with you, good luck.

Eviledna

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Is it a data breach to call someone at their registered address and registered landline when calls to their mobile number have failed? (No)

But it is a data protection breach to reveal sensitive information regarding the contract between meteor and the op to the Op's mammy who is not party to the contract, regardless of the address used. Similarly if I rent a property and run up a debt having used that address, does the landlord therefore have a right to gain full insight into my personal debt situation? Not likely.

Is it ok for op's mum to ask what this is all about? (Yes)

That's not really for any of us to say, now is it? The op's mum is no doubt aware that the contract is between their adult child and the meteor only, and any inquiry is solely a matter of the relationship between the op and their mum, private business. To comment is crossing an irrelevant appropriate boundary, IMO.

Op's Mum did not know if OP owed money that's why she asked him so Meteor didn't discuss op's account beyond what could be considered a data breach.

There's no data brach here.

I reckon the data protection commissioner would disagree with you there. To reveal the status of an account to a third party outside of the contract could be considered a breach, certainly outside of due diligence on meteor's part.

Considering meteor's recent well documented negligence in data protection, they should be held to higher standards than this!

dub45

drunkmonkey wrote: »

You've just made an assumption as well, What point am I arguing? What point are you arguing? Just was giving my 2cent like everyone else. (Welcome to the thread by the way )

I was curious to know if the bill was paid as it wasn't when the thread was started but op is now in contact with meteor.

When OP made a contract, he used his home address and landline number on the application. That's the number which was contacted.

We don't have the transcript of the call yet to confirm the data breach but going on the facts not much account if any account details were revealed.

Is it a data breach to call someone at their registered address and registered landline when calls to their mobile number have failed? (No)

Is it ok for meteor to ask how can they contact op as every other method has failed? (Yes)

Is it ok for op's mum to ask what this is all about? (Yes)

Is it ok for meteor to say it's in relation to his account? (Yes)

Op's Mum did not know if OP owed money that's why she asked him so Meteor didn't discuss op's account beyond what could be considered a data breach.

There's no data brach here.

It is bad enough that you persist in interfering but you are now recreating conversations on the basis of your fantasies - however would you at least do the op the courtesy of reading his post?

Anyway. Yesterday I got a call from my mother who asked me
"do you owe Meteor €xxx???".

If that's not a data breach then I don't know what is.

The simple fact is that as soon as the meteor rep established that they were not speaking to the account holder the conversation should have been politely ended. Even without the data protection requirements that would have been sound business practice.

dub45

Eviledna wrote: »

But it is a data protection breach to reveal sensitive information regarding the contract between meteor and the op to the Op's mammy who is not party to the contract, regardless of the address used. Similarly if I rent a property and run up a debt having used that address, does the landlord therefore have a right to gain full insight into my personal debt situation? Not likely.




That's not really for any of us to say, now is it? The op's mum is no doubt aware that the contract is between their adult child and the meteor only, and any inquiry is solely a matter of the relationship between the op and their mum, private business. To comment is crossing an irrelevant appropriate boundary, IMO.




I reckon the data protection commissioner would disagree with you there. To reveal the status of an account to a third party outside of the contract could be considered a breach, certainly outside of due diligence on meteor's part.

Considering meteor's recent well documented negligence in data protection, they should be held to higher standards than this!

Please don't encourage him/her - you are responding to an imagined conversation remember. Someone posting here for advice deserves a lot better than imagined conversations and 'angles' being looked for as if was all some sort of game.

drunkmonkey

Shane-KornSpace wrote: »

The simple fact is that as soon as the meteor rep established that they were not speaking to the account holder the conversation should have been politely ended. Even without the data protection requirements that would have been sound business practice.

dub45 wrote: »

imagined conversations and 'angles' being looked for

The conversation couldn't have ended that quickly. There chasing a debt, they need to know how to contact OP. He's probably just a few stops off legal action.
From the sounds of it they even gave the amount, that is a serious data breach but OP's mum may have offered to clear the debt. We don't know.

The imagined conversation (that was a little off the wall granted, had to re-read the post to see that)
The angle was an obvious assumption to me as the debt wasn't cleared at the time of the post. OP asked the question to see if they had broken the law. If they did OP could possibly walk away with the debt cleared or reduced. If that's not what OP was thinking my assumption is incorrect. It's how I read it. (As I said I have no problem with that and best of luck to OP if it works for him and apologies to him if it's not what he was thinking)

dub45

drunkmonkey wrote: »

The conversation couldn't have ended that quickly. There chasing a debt, they need to know how to contact OP. He's probably just a few stops off legal action.
From the sounds of it they even gave the amount, that is a serious data breach but OP's mum may have offered to clear the debt. We don't know.

The imagined conversation (that was a little off the wall granted, had to re-read the post to see that)
The angle was an obvious assumption to me as the debt wasn't cleared at the time of the post. OP asked the question to see if they had broken the law. If they did OP could possibly walk away with the debt cleared or reduced. If that's not what OP was thinking my assumption is incorrect. It's how I read it. (As I said I have no problem with that and best of luck to OP if it works for him and apologies to him if it's not what he was thinking)

We dont know so stop playing games.

drunkmonkey

dub45 wrote: »

We dont know

Glad you agree on something:)

dub45

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Glad you agree on something:)

If you dont know then follow the logical consequences and dont be speculating. People dont ask advice here for people to play games.

drunkmonkey

dub45 wrote: »

If you dont know then follow the logical consequences and dont be speculating. People dont ask advice here for people to play games.

Don't be giving me that crap everyone here speculated about something including yourself. You have no right to tell another poster to feck off and you've no right to start calling names. I didn't resort to those schoolboy antics.
The only game going on here is your tit for tat one with me you can't seem to let go of.
From the start you've been out to pick a fight with me like you've done in other threads. I don't know what your problem is but I wish you'd get over it.

Attack the Post not the poster, did you not read that in the Mod handbook maybe it's time you left the schoolyard and went back to the classroom.