5 ms·
As I understand it, this second complaint is not against the original company, but against the government authority that handled his case.
by XelNika 3mo ago
As I understand it, this second complaint is not against the original company, but against the government authority that handled his case.
- gpm 3mo agoThere's two government authorities here, the one he reported it to (Swedish), and the one that the first one forwarded it to (Norwegian). The former is the one he seems to be currently taking to task for failing to follow the law, the latter is the one that meaningfully handled the case.
- buzer 3mo agoIt's also worth noting that it's not the first time Swedish DPA has been criticized regarding GDPR complaint handling: https://noyb.eu/en/gdpr-rights-sweden https://noyb.eu/en/gdpr-rights-sweden "GDPR Rights in Sweden: Court confirms that authority must investigate complaints. So far, the Swedish IMY has taken the view that users don’t have party rights in GDPR procedures." https://noyb.eu/en/noyb-takes-swedish-dpa-court-refusing-properly-deal-complaints https://noyb.eu/en/noyb-takes-swedish-dpa-court-refusing-pro... "IMY frequently just forwards a complaint to the company that illegally processes personal data - and then immediately closes the case without investigating." (no decision on this as far as I know. A bit surprising since it has been almost 2 years)
- setgree 3mo agoAh, I got confused by the name and acronyms.