Clarkson stung after bank prank
According to the BBC, Jeremy Clarkson has involuntarily provided an illustration of the importance of keeping personal data confidential:
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.
January 8th, 2008 at 08:42
All together now: “Nothing to hide …”
January 8th, 2008 at 11:24
[...] ied in one go at the click of a button. On a related topic… ID cards… (Update: No2ID report this story…. I, along with probably countless others, emailed it to them, so it̵ [...]
January 8th, 2008 at 17:13
But Clarkson was RIGHT (though I don’t think I would have done what he did). He didn’t reveal any personal data – back accoun number, sort code , name and address are in the public domain. Every one you give a cheque to has that.
We can’t let the banks get away with the sloppy procedures which caused this to happen, even if he does. The BBC article doesn’t say so, but the Daily Mail one does – the fault was an online direct debit at the charity web site and the bank didn’t write to the account holder like they are supposed to, to confirm that they should go ahead.
January 8th, 2008 at 21:14
Rick:
Clarkson was wrong. He said there was no risk to revealing his bank details in the Sun. There was a risk. Perhaps there should not have been, but there was.
Similarly, we cannot have a National Identity Register which relies on everybody dealing with it being competent and honest. Perhaps we should be able to have such a thing in theory, but it’s never going to happen in practice, particularly not on the vast scale of the NIR.
January 9th, 2008 at 10:30
Ok Dave, I agree that he was wrong in what he said but not in what he did, or at least, shouldn’t have been.
I entirely agree about the NIR – this clearly demonstrates that not everyone is competent, not least the banks.
January 9th, 2008 at 15:21
Rick: “back accoun number, sort code , name and address are in the public domain. Every one you give a cheque to has that.”
Whoever it was that told you this is wrong!
Giving someone a cheque with those details on it is not the same as placing it in the public domain! The details are given as part of a transaction between two parties for the specific purpose of enabling a payment to take place.
These might not be considered as “personal” data as such but they are *private*.
January 13th, 2008 at 11:22
It just goes to show how easy it is to wreck someones life by sharing your information. The government knows who stole the information, they just arent saying. Makin up ideas that they were stolen is grounds for them doing even deeper searches into our private lives.