A few days ago I sent a GDPR request to some company to delete my personal data. They said to install their app and send a ticket from the app. The email was sent from the email address to which the account is registered. Is this even legal?

  • @_TheNardDog_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    423
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    No, it’s not at all legal for the company to do this. Reply and remind them they have one calendar month to comply from the date of your original request, otherwise you will make a complaint to which ever information regulator is correct for the juridiction they’re operating in.

    I’m a lawyer specialising in Data Privacy, reply here if you need more help on this one.

    Also feel free to name the company.

    • My Password Is 1234OP
      link
      fedilink
      24
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      For now, I do not want to announce the name of this company publicly.

      If they don't want to solve it amicably, then I will do so.

      • @sanpo@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        1668 months ago

        They already said they don't want to.

        They asked you to install the app on purpose, in hopes that you'll decide it's too much hassle and decide not to delete the account.

        • @el_abuelo@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          -198 months ago

          How do you know this?

          My first thought was "they probably want to ensure they are who they say they are and so want an authenticated request" - while that's against GDPR, not everyone is as educated as they should be, and not every mistake is a nefarious activity.

          • @sanpo@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            488 months ago

            There's no reason an app should be more trustworthy than the email.
            It's pretty standard for scummy companies to make the process as annoying as possible.

          • @activ8r@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            18 months ago

            The individual responding isn't the issue. They haven't made any decision to respond like this, they are following a script.

            The script is written by people who should know exactly what they are doing, so the result is either malice or negligence. Either way it's unacceptable where the law is concerned.

      • fmstrat
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        778 months ago

        This is a bad decision, IMO. They may fix it for you, but then you've lost the opportunity to assist everyone who comes after you.

        You posted asking the public for help. Please return the favor and report them, as you are legally supposed to do.

        • @Scubus@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          718 months ago

          Think of the poor corporation! If they get punished for their illegal buisness practices, it'll hurt the economy and people will be less inclined to start a small buisness. Didn't you study piss down economics?

          • @Illuminostro@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            118 months ago

            "WHAT ABOUT THE TRUE VICTIMS HERE! WHY DOESN'T ANYONE CARE ABOUT THOSE HARDWORKING, SALT-OF-THE-EARTH SHAREHOLDERS! ARE YOU PEOPLE FUCKING COMMUNISTS?!"

      • @Rodeo@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        278 months ago

        Must be something that makes you look bad lol

        Otherwise you'd just say it. You owe them nothing and they've broken the fuckin law and you're protecting them? What do they have on you?

        • lastweakness
          link
          fedilink
          288 months ago

          Or maybe they just want to disclose as little of their personal information, including services relied on, on an open platform like this. Idk if that's the case, but playing devil's advocate here

          • @Rodeo@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            -128 months ago

            Personal information like the name of a company they bought something from?

            Please

            • Roboticide
              link
              fedilink
              238 months ago

              Why should they not? They posted an inquiry, looking for advice. That is their reason for posting.

              They do not owe personal information beyond what is required to answer the question. And typically, with regards to anything resembling a legal matter, the less information posted publicly, the better.

      • @rishado@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        20
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I will never understand why people complain online then do this. Why are you being such a pushover. What does amicably even mean to you?

    • @miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      13
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      That reminds me, I might have to put in a formal complaint for a somewhat similar matter.

      Bought concert cards years ago, and was never able to unsubsribe from the newsletter. I sent requests to every mail address I could find, and never even got a response. Still got newsletters every now and then though.

      They also just make it unnecessarily hard to contact them, so at this point I'm not sure my messages even reached them, which hopefully is what explains their failure to comply.

        • @miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          28 months ago

          France in that case, so that would go to the CNIL. Though they want people to make an account to put in complaints online.

    • ram
      link
      fedilink
      English
      78 months ago

      Genuine question: Aren't you supposed to say "this is not legal advice?" if you identify yourself as a lawyer but you're not their legal council? Or am I mistaken?

    • @Nelots@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1058 months ago

      Man, Elon really does ruin everything. Can't even use X as a variable anymore without a disclaimer.

        • Echo Dot
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Too true.

          There is some arguement to be made that Facebook was kind of good at first. It was useful and it had social impacts that were positive. Over time it became toxic.

          Twitter was awful from day one though, mostly because it was bloody useless from day one. Everything that anybody used it for could have been done, and generally was also done, on Facebook, so there was literally no point in the platform.

      • Echo Dot
        link
        fedilink
        88 months ago

        It's new name is "X, formally known as Twitter". Which is what every news website on the planet calls it.

        Regardless the fact that X is a stupid name for a company, it's also dumb to rename a popular company generally anyway.

  • magnetosphere
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    1868 months ago

    No. They are obligated to obey the law as written. They don’t get to create conditions.

  • @SimonSaysStuff@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    1378 months ago

    GDPR clearly states you can contact any part of the organisation with your request. You can make your request verbally or in writing and they must acknowledge it. They can't refuse and make you use their app.

    For fun send them a Subject Access Request and if they don't acknowledge it, report them to the ICO (if you're in the UK)

  • @cosmicrookie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    698 months ago

    Simply ask for the official company name, registration number and country as well as the prereree means of communication that they would like your local data authorities to contact them on.

    Also make a 1 star review, stating that you are in talks with your local gdpr authorities about their way of handling privacy.

    This worked for me last time a company asked me to download an app to delete my account

  • @Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    66
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I had this before, though not through a direct communication. Someone had gotten my email credentials somehow and installed a company's app and made an account. When I went through the support pages on the company's site to find out how to delete the account the only listed way was through the app itself.

    They were accommodating and helpful when I emailed the company about it though. I just told them that I can't agree to the privacy policy and thus cannot install the app but still need the account to be deleted. They did it.

  • @vsis@feddit.cl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    248 months ago

    They were very friendly imo. No need to speak legalese or to be rude.

    Just tell them that you can't or don't want to install the app.

    If they don't help you, then you proceed to remind them that you are not required to install anything for them to comply with GDPR.

    • themeatbridge
      link
      fedilink
      768 months ago

      Being friendly doesn't negate the fact that they are out of compliance with the law. Even sending a second email to insist they delete your data is an undue burden.

      • @el_abuelo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        98 months ago

        You're right, but sometimes a bit of undue courtesy repays in dividends. Not every minor infraction is nefarious and not every minor infraction deserves reporting. A simple courteous reminder of their obligations may save both parties some undue hassle.

        I can imagine this company doing this to ensure only authenticated users can have their data removed. There are other ways…but this was probably what they considered reasonable and painless for all, admittedly they (wrongly) didn't consider the audience of this community in that decision.

        • @Rodeo@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          178 months ago

          A simple courteous reminder of their obligations may save both parties some undue hassle.

          Actually, the customer is already getting undue hassle, while the company is just breaking the law. Why can't we just expect better?

          • falsem
            link
            fedilink
            18 months ago

            Remember that you're talking to some poorly paid person that has to deal with unhappy people all day and probably doesn't even agree with these policies. This is no different than being in a restaurant - don't be rude to service people. Be polite, but firm. You can express that you're unhappy and that this isn't acceptable in a way that doesn't come off as berating some first level service drone.

          • @vsis@feddit.cl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -128 months ago

            Nobody broke the law lol.

            I believe they have like a month to comply.

            The just asked for a ticket in the app, to make their lifes easier. If OP doesn't want to, they still have to comply though.

            Now I remember why I hate working directly with customers.

            • @Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              38 months ago

              I believe they have like a month to comply.

              According to my training when I was handling my workplace's GDPR request email companies have 30 days to respond. Meaning they could simply have a bot respond to all incoming emails on day 29 and say "we're reviewing your request" and be in compliance for a while longer

    • @Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      548 months ago

      It's the bare minimum of friendliness expected in customer care. Most likely a macro which is normal with these kind of requests.

    • ΛdΛm_𝒷
      link
      fedilink
      English
      218 months ago

      OK, I'm not sure if this is because I'm not native speaker, but I don't sense friendliness in their reply…

      I sense annoyance - mine - like I want to delete my data and they ask indirectly for more

      If they wanna keep their database filled with dead data, sure, have at it

  • @jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    22
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Time to speak corporate to them. Write out a GDPR removal demand letter. And mail it to them certified or whatever corporate mail does in your local jurisdiction.

  • @rambos@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    138 months ago

    I had a simmilar situation with Nicehash (crypto shit company), but I had 2fa enabled and just wanted to unsubscribe from useless newsletters. They asked for a photo of me holding a paper with my personal information. Still didnt solve that, but some comments here might help, following

    • Echo Dot
      link
      fedilink
      18 months ago

      You can just call them a crypto company, them being shit is kind of implied.

      • @rambos@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        18 months ago

        I understand the hate, especially in this community. IMO not all crypto companies are shit, but nicehash is leader in being shit 😉

  • ElleChaise
    link
    fedilink
    10
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    eBay does this too. They told me they can't access my data to delete it, that I have to log in with their website or app and send information to just get my data, let alone have it deleted.

    • @rengoku2@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      58 months ago

      Doesn't ebay delete the account after certain amount of inactivity? Just let it lapse then?

      • Apathy Tree
        link
        fedilink
        English
        48 months ago

        Doubtful - I leave my account for years at a time between logins, and it’s still active (have had the account since 2002 or so, and have had at least a 10 year span without any use).

  • @Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    98 months ago

    It's way too easy to spoof email "from" addresses.

    There should be a way to do it through their website though. Requiring an app is just stupid.

    • @wido@lemmy.tf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      188 months ago

      They literally replied to his registered email and he has the reply. That would indicate that he has at least access to the account. So with OP's next email quoting the reply ownership over the associated email address should be reasonably established.

      • HeartyBeast
        link
        fedilink
        78 months ago

        That would indicate that he someone has at least access to the account.

        • @nybble41@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          18 months ago

          If you can read emails sent to a given address, and send replies from that address, it basically is your email address for all practical purposes no matter who was meant to be using the account. This is not necessarily a good thing and better end-to-end security would be nice but it is what it is. Odds are the app itself would let anyone change the password and log in provided they can read the emails, unless it's using some form of 2FA.

    • My Password Is 1234OP
      link
      fedilink
      9
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Their site is just a landing page, there's no login option or anything like that. Their business is a smartphone application.

      Edit: Gmail uses SPF, DMARC and DKIM signing so spoofing is not possible if their email services are configured properly.

      • @Onioneer@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        68 months ago

        SPF/DKIM/DMARC does not prevent sending the spoofed message, though. It is up to the recipient system to filter out the message should the checks fail. Even then, the message often lands into spam instead of being dropped.

        • My Password Is 1234OP
          link
          fedilink
          38 months ago

          Anyway they should configure their systems to reject unsigned e-mails and providers that don't have a proper SPF configuration. SPF (Sender Policy Framework) allows you to make sure that the message was sent by an approved server and was not forged by some hackur.

          • @fatalError@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            48 months ago

            You'd be surprised how many legitimate email are sent with failed SPF. Even Microsoft sometimes doesn't update their MX records and the SPF fails.

            • @Onioneer@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              18 months ago

              That is especially true with large organizations where multiple non-technical teams are ordering/configuring products that send email.

              Unfortunately it is difficult to solve, unless services stop allowing sending without verifying and forcing proper configuration. That would drive sales to competitors who do not enforce this, though.