Data Protection Act 1998: Enforcement Notice

This assignment examines an Enforcement Notice issued under the Data Protection Act 1998. It details a case where Mihomecare Ltd, a data controller, failed to comply with a subject access request and the sixth data protection principle. The Information Commissioner investigated the matter and found that Mihomecare Ltd had provided inaccurate personal data and failed to adequately respond to the complainant. The notice outlines Mihomecare Ltd's obligations to rectify the situation within 30 days, including informing the complainant about the data processed and providing a copy of their personal data file in accordance with Section 7 of the DPA.

DATA PROTECTION ACT 1998
SUPERVISORY POWER OF THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
ENFORCEMENT NOTICE
DATE
To: Mihomecare ltd, 1Harlequin Office Park, Fieldfare, Bristol, England, BS16 7FN
Of: Karin Suurpere, Appt 2885, Chynoweth Park, Trevissome Park, Truro, TR4 8UN
1. Mihomecare ltd is a “data controllers” as defined in section 1(1) of the DPA 1998
2. DPA sec. 4(4) of the DPA presents that subject to sec. 27(1), it is data controller obligation to
carry out data protection doctrine in respect to all private data which data controllers has.
3. Section 42 of the DPA made assessment request which considered by the ICO
4. Data controllers decline to react again the application for assessment concern which related
to subject access request made by the complaints with Section 7 of the DPA demanded the
compliment.
5. Paragraph 3 referred the assessment which issue appear out of the request, considered by the
commissioner. In the adjoining to further correspondence that commissioner has to send to
data supervisor regarding this case situation which has not been answer back.
6. DPA schedule 1 of part 1 describes the sixth data protections principle.
 The rightful of the dossier subject under this act process in accordance with personal data.
7. Commissioner recognises that data controller fail to apply the sixth dossier doctrine and also
oppose the section 7, therefore it fails to provide the dossier to defendant, beyond unjustified
postponement, whether data controller tasked time to process private dossier. In another case
fail without undue interval, to have indicates to complainer in an intelligible from such
indication as may formed such secret dossier.
8. The commissioner investigated, as necessary to do under DPA part 40(2) that serve the
enforcement notice, if any of person damages and distress by contravention than
commissioner observed that such damages and distress occurrence as result of provide
inaccurate private detail.
9. In view of the sec 40 of the act, data controller shall within 30 days have to inform-
10. Data controllers must indicate to complainer if private data are processed and he also sends
copy of any private dossier so procedure must follow as accordance to sec 7 along with sixth
data protection principle. Subject matter must be clear.
Dated:
Signature:
Comments about DPA rule relating to inaccurate data:

1. Data controller must follow sixth principle as per the section 7 of DPA act.
2. Data controller must process data according to eight fundamental terms which are stated in
the DPA act.
3. Private data must be appropriate; consistent as well as it should be short and simple.
4. Personal data must be summarized with important points that must be highlighted.
5. There must be use of such techniques by which personal data cannot be accessed by any
unauthorised person as if these techniques would not be used, there may be loss of data.
6. There must be secret data processed in accordance with the sixth principle and section 7 of
DPA rule.
7. Dossier should not be sent directly as it must be processed from different trained people.
8. Further, if data controller feels that there is any information which can negatively affect then
it should not be disclosed even if the data is important.