GDPR and OMCs

Cyrus wrote: »

Quick qn,

should an OMC be allowed to provide a list to all members of which properties havent paid their management fees?

Given that all property owners are members, and all should be entitled to see a debtors listing for the company id hope so, but these days its hard to know

Unlikely. I know pre GDPR we looked into it and were told no. However we could produce a list of thanks to those who had paid

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Provided the people who paid, give permission.

Funnily enough that was universally forthcoming. Unit numbers not names.

Caranica wrote: »

Unlikely. I know pre GDPR we looked into it and were told no. However we could produce a list of thanks to those who had paid

Whoever told you that was likely of limited skill in the area. Anything which “tends” to provide personal data is precluded. Providing a list of those who have paid by elimination tends to identify those who haven’t and would thus disclose personal data about those individuals.

Marcusm wrote: »

Whoever told you that was likely of limited skill in the area. Anything which “tends” to provide personal data is precluded. Providing a list of those who have paid by elimination tends to identify those who haven’t and would thus disclose personal data about those individuals.

Any evidence to back this up.
GDPR wouldn't cover what you are suggesting here so what are you basing it on

listermint wrote: »

Any evidence to back this up.
GDPR wouldn't cover what you are suggesting here so what are you basing it on

Simon Great Motorbike wrote: »

What legislation are you quoting from with the “tends” ?

“Tends” is not used in GDPR itself. There is no express legal provision that states that a negative disclosure is a breach of the requirement not to disclose private data but it is self-evident that such a disclosure of it disclose the fact that a certain cohort has not paid is a disclosure of that data (the fact of non-payment). An employer cannot state that, “the following is a list of persons who do not earn €100,000 per annum” and then list all team members but one thereby disclosing that person’s salary. Likewise to list the households who are not in arrears is to disclose that the other households have not made the required payment which is the disclosure of data about them without a lawful reason or excuse. A listing of persons against whom enforcement proceedings had been commenced to recover debt might not be a breach as the taking of court action is a public record.

Law is about interpretation as much as the express rules

Simon Great Motorbike wrote: »

But you appear to be quoting, quoting is not interpreting. And now it turns out that you're not quoting from any relevent legislation at all! :eek:

I was OMC Director for a number of years. What Marcusm posted is exactly the legal advice we received on this very matter. And there are solicitors among the unit owners.

The independent advice we received is that you cannot identify individuals who have not paid their subs, either directly (by listing those who have not paid) or indirectly (by listing those who have paid).

A thought you might like to tease out with a lawyer.

GDPR applies to personally identifying data.

Saying that Paddy Murphy has paid is personally identifying.

Saying that fees have not been received for Apartment 7 Ard Somewhere for 2019 is not actually identifying any person.

For data to be PII, a person has to be named or inferred. But an address does not infer a person, because the reader doesn't know who the property owner (ie liable fee payer) actually is: in many cases, its not the resident.

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

A thought you might like to tease out with a lawyer.

GDPR applies to personally identifying data.

Saying that Paddy Murphy has paid is personally identifying.

Saying that fees have not been received for Apartment 7 Ard Somewhere for 2019 is not actually identifying any person.

For data to be PII, a person has to be named or inferred. But an address does not infer a person, because the reader doesn't know who the property owner (ie liable fee payer) actually is: in many cases, its not the resident.

OMC maintain a register of property owners, every member is allowed to examine this register, the unit owner alone is legally responsible for payment of fees under Section 18 of the MUD Act, who resides there is immaterial.

https://www.ccpc.ie/consumers/housing/apartments-and-duplexes/owners-management-companies/

TSQ wrote: »

Stubbs Gazette publishes lists of debtors, seemingly not affected by GDPR?

Because there is some poor interpretation here of what GDPR covers. That's why.

Let's use the example above. Members are allowed to access the register.

If one of the members were to access the register and take some PI and publish it for public consumption then GDPR compliance would come in to play.

The notion that name is on a legal document which members have access to has no consequence.

Simon Great Motorbike wrote: »

What legislation are you quoting from with the “tends” ?

Section 56.45.34.667 of Section 94 of the Makey Uppy Everything I don't like Covered by GDPR Nah Nah legislation of course...*

Literally replying to their posts is a contravention of GDPR as that is identifiable.