Information Commissioner's Office Avis 500

I've reported 2 separate issues to the ICO, one of which left me seriously ill as a result. I have yet to receive any correspondence from them. It has been over 6 months since my first report, and over 2 since my second and more serious report.
As far as I'm concerned the ICO exist in name only.

Dear Charity Commission,
I am writing to raise serious concerns regarding the conduct of Stanley Community Centre, which I understand is a registered charity. I believe their actions may constitute a breach of both data protection laws and human rights principles.
It has come to my attention that individuals affiliated with this centre—including service users and potentially staff—have been encouraged to take photographs of me without my consent. These images have reportedly been shared with others, including individuals outside the centre’s immediate community, with the intent to incite harm or harassment against me.
This behaviour is not only morally reprehensible but may also violate:
UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018 regarding the unlawful collection, processing, and dissemination of personal data (i.e., photographs).
Human Rights Act 1998 – particularly Article 8 (Right to respect for private and family life) and Article 3 (Prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment).
Charity Governance Standards – which require charities to operate with integrity, accountability, and in the public interest.
I strongly urge the Commission to investigate this matter and consider whether Stanley Community Centre is acting in accordance with its charitable objectives and legal obligations. I am prepared to provide further evidence and documentation if required.
Please confirm receipt of this complaint and advise on the next steps.

Yours sincerely

Called the ICO Helpline for help with a question I had on data protection. Whilst the answer I was given was clear and factual, I don’t think I will ever again call them for help because of the way I was spoken to. The ICO staff member was very abrupt and I had the impression that they really resented speaking to the public.

Utterly Shocking Negligence by the ICO – Breach of Duty and Public Trust

I am appalled by the disgraceful lack of action and transparency by the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO). Over the past several months, I have submitted multiple complaints relating to serious breaches of data protection and privacy law — yet I have received no response, no updates, and no accountability.

They claim that there is a backlog of 20+ weeks, but my case has now far exceeded even that excuse. This is not a delay — this is dereliction of statutory duty.

The ICO is legally obligated under the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018 to:

Provide timely and reasonable updates to data subjects (Article 12(3) UK GDPR),

Investigate complaints “without undue delay,”

Uphold the rights of the individual under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (right to privacy),

And act transparently in accordance with the public body code of conduct.

By failing to respond in a reasonable timeframe or even acknowledge valid and lawful complaints, the ICO is:

In breach of Article 12(3) UK GDPR (timely communication with the data subject),

In breach of their role under Section 165 of the Data Protection Act 2018 (requirement to respond to complaints),

Violating the principle of accountability under Article 5(2) of the GDPR.

This is especially disturbing given the ICO’s public role as the UK’s independent authority to uphold information rights. They are failing the very people they were designed to protect — and in doing so, are enabling corporations and institutions to abuse data rights without consequence.

This has caused me significant stress, frustration, and delay in resolving ongoing legal disputes — and undermines any trust the public should have in this regulatory body.

If the ICO cannot fulfill its core function, it is not merely incompetent — it is complicit in the erosion of data rights in this country.

I demand a full investigation into this misconduct and urge others affected by ICO negligence to escalate complaints to their MP, the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, and — where applicable — initiate legal remedy under administrative law.

This is not just a delay — this is systemic failure and public betrayal.

I submitted a formal complaint to the ICO with strong, well-documented evidence showing that a third party had likely breached data protection obligations. At first, I received a clear and supportive response acknowledging the issue. But after my case was reassigned, things went downhill quickly.

The ICO case person did not engage with the evidence I provided. Each new response seemed to sidestep the substance of my complaint, while gradually downplaying the ICO’s role — as if to lower my expectations and nudge me toward giving up.

Instead of providing clarity or support, they now advise me to seek help elsewhere — which is frustrating, considering their legal mandate to protect data rights in the UK.

Been passed from pillow to post over the issues I am having with a neighbour who is harassing me and invading my privacy using CCTV footage on me and my property. I have evidence to proof what they're doing and my neighbour is breaking the law. I rung up 101 for advice, they told me the council is best. Spoke to the council, they advised me to use this company. I was given a number, soon as you ring it. You're immediately cut off. I then tried the online chat, explained my issues. I was then told they don't deal with the issues I am having. Told me to ring up 101, I explained I have already done this. They didn't even ask me on what my issues are. Within seconds of me sending my reply via their live chat. The agent cut the chat and closed it. Absolutely ridiculous and rude. This company is waste of time. Avoid it! I will have to find someone else to help me

Absolute shameful organization, that claims it can help - but never does. When the GDPR came into place it infected every organisation to comply - or else. It made Companies' processes a misery and people handling data lives hell, HOWEVER - when you exercise your GDPR rights - it is all a dead end. ICO should be closed down as an absolute waste of space entity. SHAME on all of you who work at the ICO an utter embarrassment to humanity. After 3 serious accounts of data breaches the ICO did absolutely nothing.

They’re absolutely biased so I don’t know why they always claim to not take sides because they absolutely do. How? They provided all my evidence and complaint details to the organisation and when I requested their response they refused and their excuse — they need organisations to trust them.

“The disclosure of a third party organisation’s correspondence provided to the ICO
in confidence would affect organisations’ trust and confidence that their replies to the ICO’s enquiries will be afforded an appropriate level of confidentiality.

Disclosure in this instance would therefore prejudice the ICO’s regulatory
function, as this would result in organisations being unwilling to engage with the
ICO or co-operate with our investigations in future.”

If that’s true they don’t have much power so what’s the purpose? They even ignore multiple breaches that had plenty of evidence and all they say is go to court instead so what even is the point of the ICO?

If you can’t afford legal action and the ICO won’t act what protection do you really have? None. That’s the problem.

Its as bad as a scam company. They are so bad its hard to believe they are not a Nigerian call centre running a spoof. There is no way of contacting them, they charge but don't send an invoice nor how much and they don't even say how they took payment. They make HMRC look good!!

On the Guido Fawkes site.

Civil servants at the Information Commissioner’s Office have truly mastered the art of turning work hours into staff network social time. According to an FOI request from the TaxPayers’ Alliance, seen by Guido, between April 2024 and March 2025, ICO pen-pushers clocked up a total of 8 hours over 10 meetings in “Inclusion” staff network meetings. Meanwhile, the “Pride” network soaked up 11 hours across 14 meetings. A further 10 hours over 14 meetings were dedicated to “Race, Ethnicity, Culture, and Heritage” discussions. Naturally all during working hours…

Some more notable events include:

‘Got Skills: Get into running’
‘Got Skills: Allotment gardening and caring for houseplants’
‘Got Skills: Knitting for beginners and for better mental health’
‘Virtual menopause yoga’
‘Gender and Ethnicity Pay Gap Reporting’

All of this ‘staff network’ time is backed by a taxpayer budget of £12,000. Time for that ‘bonfire’…

Disgusting disappointed,

After siding with me on a call Helen Armstrong changed her mind I provided evidence she didnt, no reason maybe shes a loon who likes covering up for criminals.... Well done ico another useless organisation....
Funded by tax money as long as you get paid you dont care. Dont waste time im apalled at Helens hypocrisy shame on uk, ico, police, council and government criminals

I first wrote to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) in January 2025 about a breach of data involving my application for a new passport, my application having been made electronically from a local Post Office. I don’t want to go into further details for security reasons. (But yes, that’s the same Post Office that used defective computer-based accounting software several years ago that wrongly implicated several hundred postmasters in alleged fraud, resulting in some being sent to prison, others being made bankrupt, and a few even taking their own lives as a result).

I received an initial letter from the ICO, beginning “Dear Sir/Madam” even though I had previously made clear in my letter to them that I was male! That already gives you a clue as to the thoroughness with which the ICO works.

When nothing happened for several weeks, I phoned the ICO, only to be told that due to the high volume of complaints that they receive, the earliest I could expect any reply was mid-April 2025. I later sent ICO a written update on the situation, urging them to take action.

Still nothing, so I phoned them again, this time getting through to a woman who – surprise, surprise! – was apparently working from home! (Could working from home be the reason for the very long delays before ICO actually DOES anything? Or is it because breaching data regulations within the UK is now as normal as finding sand on the seashore? In which case why isn’t the Government cracking down on this, instead of trusting data-protection enforcement to a totally useless entity like ICO?)

But no sooner had I made phone contact with the woman at ICO than my phone packed in – my phone had run out of charge.

Then, completely out of the blue, the Post Office finally replied to my outstanding complaint, made in summer 2024. Of course, they denied responsibility for what happened – as had all the other companies involved. Nevertheless, there clearly HAD been a breach of data..... somewhere. The Post Office offered me token compensation instead, which I accepted.

So if your data is ever breached, don’t waste time contacting the ICO – they’re probably too busy sipping a gin-and-tonic in the lounge while watching Coronation Street to take any action, always blaming any delays on their backlog of work. I didn’t try contacting the police, though they’re probably too busy investigating whether the guy at the end of the street has any politically-incorrect ideas to even bother with something as trivial as a data-breach.

Moral: forget about new-fangled electronic methods of communication. It’s probably safer to post a letter instead!!! The only problem: posting a letter usually involves the Post Office. Back to Square One.

If the government is serious about getting better value for taxpayer money. This pointless and utterly useless office must be the first to go. This is a so called watchdog which is asleep all the time, can't bite and wouldn't bark. Can't understand what is it trying to achieve and probably only wasted taxpayer's money as a result. My vote to abolish it all together.

If you ask for Subject Access Request you expect that you get the documents or information that when you call the organisation you are complaining about use to give you information.

I proved to The ICO that the organisation I complained about had not given me the files they use to discuss customers.

The ICO replied saying as they replied to me basically the case is closed. So any organisation just has to reply to an SAR with minimal information and can quite happily leave as much out as they like, and The ICO will close a complainant's case.

An utter waste of taxpayers' money.

Pointless organisation that offers no value and serves to purpose.
Takes years to acknowledge complaints and then fails to address them adequately.
Sends a template letter of which the complainant does not get a copy and announces the case is closed without waiting to see whether offending organisation will comply.

However they have different rules for NHS data breaches in that they actively defend, justify and enable these.

One 1 occasion they took years to acknowledge a complaint and said " well we've taken so long to get back to you that there's probably no point us taking it further. "

I approached the ICO as a company would not provide data under a SAR without putting up unusual obstacles. nor would they respond to emails.
ICO chat was very unhelpful, suggesting I contact them. Yes, thats the ICO suggesting I contact the people I'm complaining about - because they dont repsond to contacts.
When I said a bit of a waste of time they said I could make a complaint to them about the company, but they were very busy indeed.
I took the hint and gave up.
Ultimately as consumers we all pay for the ICO organisation. That would appear to be wasted money, funding yet another not fit for purpose quango / job creation scheme.

I contacted Citizens Advice regarding an issue with Amazon requesting photo ID. They strongly recommended I reach out to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) as it may involve a personal data breach. Unfortunately, my experience with the ICO was extremely disappointing.

The customer service representative I spoke with was arrogant, argumentative, and unhelpful to the point that I felt compelled to end the call. Rather than offering guidance, they spoke to me in a condescending tone, raised their voice, and questioned why I had called, insisting they didn’t have the information I needed and that I should contact Citizens Advice again. When I clarified that I was only seeking advice, their response became even more combative, suggesting that I had no grounds to be concerned since I don’t work for Amazon.

I was simply trying to act on guidance from Citizens Advice and protect my personal data. Based on this experience, I will not be contacting the ICO again, and I intend to file a formal complaint regarding the way I was treated. No one seeking advice should be spoken to in such a dismissive and disrespectful manner.

Company ignored my SAR. Complained to ICO. ICO requests evidence only from me, not from the company. Company can say whatever they want even if my evidence proves them wrong, and the ICO still sides with them. Was told to contact the company again even though I showed 5 emails they already ignored. Company said they spoke with me on the phone and I didn't want my data. ICO sided with them. ICO then ignored my complaint.

I tried to report what I believe to be a legitimate case of personal data misuse, following the ICO’s official guidance. After submitting my phone number to a single online service, I began receiving scam calls — including one impersonating HMRC.

I contacted the ICO via their live chat, explained the situation calmly and clearly, and was immediately told it was not their concern — without asking for any real detail. Because I hadn’t contacted the (suspicious) company directly first, I was also blocked from submitting the report through the official form.

The system leaves no room for good-faith reporting when you suspect your data has been mishandled by a potentially untrustworthy service. I expected at least a basic intake of information — instead, I was dismissed entirely.

It easy for any private or public organisation to circumnavigate the freedom of information act and the ICO are unable or unwilling to do anything. If you don't except their fob offs they class you "vexatious" and refuse to discuss it further. Do you think they lose sleep over 1☆ reviews? Of course not their high salaries (200k for the head) are guaranteed. Just another pointless government quango and a complete waste of tax payers money.