Any experts on Data Protection Act

[miravgraves]

Just bin refused info under the dpa concerning my self and my illness it was refused because the information contains a third party views on it and there permission cant be sought because they no longer work there iv had a look threw the act and its a bit hard to follow but can some make sence of this please i will copy and paste soon. But i think i can get round the consent by useing 4 b can you look and see what you think and p.m on this personal matter thanking you scott p.s i know the others names on document thats why names cant be blank out

(4)Where a data controller cannot comply with the request without disclosing information relating to another individual who can be identified from that information, he is not obliged to comply with the request unless—

(a)the other individual has consented to the disclosure of the information to the person making the request, or

(b)it is reasonable in all the circumstances to comply with the request without the consent of the other individual.

(5)In subsection (4) the reference to information relating to another individual includes a reference to information identifying that individual as the source of the information sought by the request; and that subsection is not to be construed as excusing a data controller from communicating so much of the information sought by the request as can be communicated without disclosing the identity of the other individual concerned, whether by the omission of names or other identifying particulars or otherwise.

(6)In determining for the purposes of subsection (4)(b) whether it is reasonable in all the circumstances to comply with the request without the consent of the other individual concerned, regard shall be had, in particular, to—

(a)any duty of confidentiality owed to the other individual,

(b)any steps taken by the data controller with a view to seeking the consent of the other individual,

(c)whether the other individual is capable of giving consent, and

(d)any express refusal of consent by the other individual.

(7)An individual making a request under this section may, in such cases as may be prescribed, specify that his request is limited to personal data of any prescribed description.

(8)Subject to subsection (4), a data controller shall comply with a request under this section promptly and in any event before the end of the prescribed period beginning with the relevant day.

[Moggie]

You have most probably already seen this link but have you tried phoning the number for advise.

ico.org.uk/for_the_public/p...

Moggie x

[Ireby in reply to Moggie]

If you Google 'access medical records NHS Choices' you will see that the only grounds on which your request should be turned down are that it would cause physical or mental distress to you or the person who is identifiable from the records, even if the other person objects. There is an appeal process if they continue to be obstructive.

You can easily ask that you are given everything except the identifiable comment. Or on the other hand you could say that you will pursue a Freedom of Information request for the full record if it continues to be withheld.

The expectation now in the NHS is that patients can access their records.

Sounds to me as if some doctor has made a rather unwise non-medical comment on your records which the practice is keen to hide!

[miravgraves]

no havnt seen this site thanks moggie very helpfull

[Granitecitygirl]

why can't they just black the name of the 3rd party out?

[helvella Administrator Thyroid UK in reply to Granitecitygirl]

Because there are so many ways of seeing through such things. We are in an era of phenomenal technology - it is perfectly feasible that taking a picture on a mobile phone and processing it in the right way would reveal what is underneath.

It is also sometimes possible to identify small fragments (like names) by their lengths! E.g. practice with three doctors, Dr Smith, Dr White and Dr Cholmondeley-Smythe-Whittington.

Rod

[miravgraves in reply to Granitecitygirl]

i know the name of the person in question they say there is a third party concern and cant release info untill they get consent from third party. Third party no longer works there and cant be found supposedly. So names cant be blanked out either.

[debjs]

I worked for the NHS and part of my job was reviewing health records for the area I worked in before they were released, usually to court, but we just deleted any third party information if it was not possible to gain their consent. However gaining consent was usually a relatively easy process so this is just an excuse. If it is hospital records PALS can be very helpful. They gave me the relevant information to access my hospital records however I am sure nobody checked them anyway because I had a copy of somebody else's as well!

[Hidden in reply to debjs]

thought it was only me that happened to.

Ironic that my GP obviously scrutinied my records before releasing as when I received my records there was a prescription for someone else signed by said GP and a record of a telephone consultation by this gp with a other patient!!!!! ironic some of mine were missing but I get other peoples (where is data protection in that)

[leighma81]

Under the freedom of information act you are entitled to your information regardless of whether it contains information of a third party perspective. You need to raise a subject access request and they are allowed to charge up to £40 to release this but they are bound by legal legislation to provide you with the info you request.

Don't allow them to fob you off as you can ask the information commissioner to intercept and they won't want that focus from the ICO.

Good luck x

[TP26 in reply to leighma81]

It's £50 max and they have 40 days to respond. I know as I've just done and was charged £50.00.

[Jackie]

Hi I recently had a problem with a non medical person at a private hospital disclosing deflamatory ( and wrong) info about me to 2 of my consultant.Without my permission. The one has altered his treatment of me on this basis. I phoned the government office, ICO 0303 123 1113. I think there different other numbers on the WEB. They were so helpful. Basically you write or e mail the person , and ask what exclusion clause in the data protection act allowed them to do that. In my case, the person knew they were guilty and would not reply. So I phoned again to ICO and said in that case they would investigate now instead of after I had received the info.If medical details between 2 docs etc and not true, impossible to do anything, I did that, had to avoid a certain lethal hospital in future.Tried evrything else, not on records etc as not true, rumours form a GP who hates me!I have had lots of fights about records etc, so if I can help further , get back to me. It is all very hard work!I only would do it if seriously effected something.

Best wishes,

Jackie

If I can help further click on "Reply to this" under this post, or PM me ( private message) if prefer. Click on my name for that.