I think as long as no data has been used maliciously the bank will now ask for their data back since it’s now been made public.
You can keep mine, makes depressing reading anyway.
Sounds like someone trying to drag this out and make a point. Think a normal person would just walk into a branch, dump it on their desk and say ‘Your problem now!’ then carry on with your life.
Let’s see… 1,600 breaches and a maximum fine of 4% of global annual turnover per incident…
Ten year old bank records…could be used as nesting material in a rabbit hutch?
Was only last week they were caught laundering millions.
Sounds like she’s held on to the records purely as leverage to try and get a settlement out of Natwest after getting sacked – and they have now called her bluff.
Is it normal for bank staff to be taking customer details home to start with?
>In exchange for the return of the information, the woman “continues to seek a settlement agreement involving payment from the bank and an uncapped indemnity in relation to any claims against her,” a spokesperson for NatWest Group said.
So she’s refusing to hand the documents back unless she gets paid. isn’t this a bit… extortiony
When directly translated to English, he actually says ‘Play Wonderwall’.
I am puzzled that they say they sacked her for refusing to return the data, but that they thought it had all been returned in 2012. Did they not check?
If Natwest had any common sense, they would have taken it all back immediately to avoid a story like this. It would be surprising for them to not check that every last detail had been returned, but that all depends on how much you believe Natwest really care about data protection.
To be honest, under the bed go most things you’re not sure what to do with. When you’re a kid doing a 5 min spring clean.
I know it’s a cliche that reddit users don’t read the article, but man, some of the comments on here…
14 comments
I think as long as no data has been used maliciously the bank will now ask for their data back since it’s now been made public.
You can keep mine, makes depressing reading anyway.
Sounds like someone trying to drag this out and make a point. Think a normal person would just walk into a branch, dump it on their desk and say ‘Your problem now!’ then carry on with your life.
Let’s see… 1,600 breaches and a maximum fine of 4% of global annual turnover per incident…
Ten year old bank records…could be used as nesting material in a rabbit hutch?
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/oct/07/natwest-fine-money-laundering-failings-bank
Was only last week they were caught laundering millions.
Sounds like she’s held on to the records purely as leverage to try and get a settlement out of Natwest after getting sacked – and they have now called her bluff.
Is it normal for bank staff to be taking customer details home to start with?
>In exchange for the return of the information, the woman “continues to seek a settlement agreement involving payment from the bank and an uncapped indemnity in relation to any claims against her,” a spokesperson for NatWest Group said.
So she’s refusing to hand the documents back unless she gets paid. isn’t this a bit… extortiony
When directly translated to English, he actually says ‘Play Wonderwall’.
I am puzzled that they say they sacked her for refusing to return the data, but that they thought it had all been returned in 2012. Did they not check?
If Natwest had any common sense, they would have taken it all back immediately to avoid a story like this. It would be surprising for them to not check that every last detail had been returned, but that all depends on how much you believe Natwest really care about data protection.
To be honest, under the bed go most things you’re not sure what to do with. When you’re a kid doing a 5 min spring clean.
I know it’s a cliche that reddit users don’t read the article, but man, some of the comments on here…