Europe

This page considers pretexting in the UK and other parts of Europe.

     introduction

Pretexting is based on needs and opportunities - whether people will pay for data and whether vulnerabilities allow it to be obtained - rather than law. That means it is unsurprising that blagging - the UK term for pretexting - occurs in the United Kingdom and in other parts of Europe, despite national and EU-wide data protection law and restrictions on fraud.

In November 2006, arguably spurred by coverage of abuses in the UK, the UK Information Commissioner (the national data protection watchdog and counterpart of the OFPC in Australia) called for action against organisations and individuals that illicitly obtain, purchase and use personal information.

The Commissioner warned of raids and prosecutions following conviction of a husband and wife team - trading as Analysis & Business Research - that made over £140,000 a year selling personal information that it obtained by deception. That information included details of business and personal bank accounts (including current balances, direct debits, transactions and savings). It also included tax returns, unlisted phone number, address and postal details. The offenders pleaded guilty to breaching UK Data Protection law and were ordered to pay £14,800 in fines and costs.

In April 2007 a private investigator used by companies such as General Motors chasing vehicle hire purchase and bank debtors was convicted at Kingston magistrates court. Nicholas Munroe had posed as an official, deceiving staff of the Department for Works & Pensions into supplying home addresses of more than 250 people over the phone. He was convicted of 44 offences of stealing and selling private data in a prosecution brought by the Information Commissioner. Munroe was fined £3,200 plus £5,000 costs. As with the earlier case, the impact of those penalties can be assessed on the basis that the court was told Munro's Infofind had an annual turnover of £100,000 and on one day alone made £6,000 by obtaining 245 addresses through a "few telephone calls".

The Commissioner argued for penalties against purchasers of such data, who have traditionally claimed ignorance of the sources of the information and operated through intermediaries such as private investigation agencies. Purchasers highlighted by the Commissioner included US insurance giant CNA, Japanese manufacturer Daikin and leading law firms such as Mishcon de Reya and Arnold & Porter. The Commissioner also indicated a list of 305 journalists who have used illegal methods, presumably one reason why calls for increased penalties (including prison terms for data thieves) have been opposed by some newspapers as a threat to free speech.




     next page  (Australia)