Garda keeps giving my phone number out and not there own.

28-02-2020 8:20pm

KWAG2019 wrote: »

This is a problem at Garda end, taking posts at face value. No reason OP should do anything to inconvenience himself to solve their problem. In an era of two factor authentication and contactless payments changing a number is going to be a PITA. Write to the super and give a few examples. Says its Data Protection breach and maybe GSOC if it keeps up. Give them a fortnight. Log everything.

It's no problem to the guards, they are not getting people calling them by mistake, the OP is. & it is clearly giving him some distress......

Data protection breach, lol
Clearly people are misdialling. I don't know how anyone thinks anything else!

skooterblue2 · 28-02-2020 8:23pm

KWAG2019 wrote: »

. Says its Data Protection breach and maybe GSOC if it keeps up. Give them a fortnight. Log everything.

Mention GPRD and the Data Protection Commision. The Data Protection will want to do an Audit afterwards and you never know what that will turn up. that will fet stuff moving

Yourmama · 28-02-2020 8:35pm

I feel your pain. Some taxi driver/take away delivery guy in Cork is handing out my number. I had to set my phone automatically go on mute at night with exception of known numbers. Wasn't fun getting calls at 3am from drunkards looking for a fare. I also complained to deliveroo and they did nothing about it.

RobbieMD · 28-02-2020 8:41pm

KWAG2019 wrote: »

This is a problem at Garda end, taking posts at face value. No reason OP should do anything to inconvenience himself to solve their problem. In an era of two factor authentication and contactless payments changing a number is going to be a PITA. Write to the super and give a few examples. Says its Data Protection breach and maybe GSOC if it keeps up. Give them a fortnight. Log everything.

Is the Garda doing anything wrong though? The callers leaving voicemails are voluntarily leaving their data. The Garda is not disclosing other person’s data on the poster’s voicemail. I can’t see any wrongdoing by the Garda. I can’t see his Superintendent being able to force him to do anything, and I don’t see GSOC being able to hold him accountable for the actions of others.

Crock Rock · 28-02-2020 8:57pm

prinzeugen wrote: »

08X +++ +++=

The X has 5 possibilities

The plus has 9 remaining possibilities

And the = has 8 possibilitis

Your number has 360 possibilities ðŸ˜‚

the_pen_turner · 28-02-2020 9:26pm

Crock Rock wrote: »

The X has 5 possibilities

The plus has 9 remaining possibilities

And the = has 8 possibilitis

Your number has 360 possibilities &#55357;&#56834;

surely = has 9 as well , 0 can be used as the last number

ohnonotgmail · 28-02-2020 9:27pm

prinzeugen wrote: »

08X +++ +++=

if the first 6 digits are the same then i have already described exactly what is happening as the same thing happens to me. Except in your case it is even easier to make a mistake.

KWAG2019 · 28-02-2020 9:34pm

RobbieMD wrote: »

Is the Garda doing anything wrong though? The callers leaving voicemails are voluntarily leaving their data. The Garda is not disclosing other person’s data on the poster’s voicemail. I can’t see any wrongdoing by the Garda. I can’t see his Superintendent being able to force him to do anything, and I don’t see GSOC being able to hold him accountable for the actions of others.

AGS have previously been informed of issue. Issue persists. What steps have been taken by AGS? Have they given the correct number on a business card to people? Have they sent the number as a business card direct to phone of the person who needs it? There are simple steps here to solve this.

So who is disclosing data? Callers are leaving messages in good faith that that is a Garda number. AGS have knowledge of the problem and done nothing. Negligence. There is a start for GSOC. Why has AGS persisted with a number giving rise to data breaches and, horror of horrors, imagine a journalist hacked OP’s voicemail and an investigation, prosecution or trial was compromised? Tut tut.

There is a data breach occurring. I’d be inclined to report to Suped that it’s going to Data Commissioner. Let Super decide if they want to find out who’s responsible.

OP: check your tyres, tax, insurance. 😉

OU812 · 28-02-2020 9:38pm

Is the number 0118 999 881 999 119 725 3

or 087 999 999 9

??

spurious · 28-02-2020 9:39pm

It may be an 086 or 087 rather than 085 mistake which is easier make than the big number.

cruizer101 · 28-02-2020 9:42pm

Crock Rock wrote: »

The X has 5 possibilities

The plus has 9 remaining possibilities

And the = has 8 possibilitis

Your number has 360 possibilities ðŸ˜‚

They have the number 20 years, I think that limits x to 6 or 7 (there was 8 back then also but they're all gone), so down to 144.

Edit: as pen Turner pointed out it could finish with 0 so 162 options (I actually suspect given age of number + is further limited but don't know for sure) .

I feel sorry for op but I can't see that anything wrong is being done. No one is doing it deliberately. Depending on the guards number it could be easy to misdial with the same number so many times.

28-02-2020 9:44pm

KWAG2019 wrote: »

AGS have previously been informed of issue. Issue persists. What steps have been taken by AGS? Have they given the correct number on a business card to people? Have they sent the number as a business card direct to phone of the person who needs it? There are simple steps here to solve this.

So who is disclosing data? Callers are leaving messages in good faith that that is a Garda number. AGS have knowledge of the problem and done nothing. Negligence. There is a start for GSOC. Why has AGS persisted with a number giving rise to data breaches and, horror of horrors, imagine a journalist hacked OP’s voicemail and an investigation, prosecution or trial was compromised? Tut tut.

There is a data breach occurring. I’d be inclined to report to Suped that it’s going to Data Commissioner. Let Super decide if they want to find out who’s responsible.

OP: check your tyres, tax, insurance. ðŸ˜‰

BS

tuxy · 28-02-2020 11:08pm

spurious wrote: »

It may be an 086 or 087 rather than 085 mistake which is easier make than the big number.

No can't be, his number is so simple it is totally impossible for people to make a mistake.

The garda has a vendeta against him.

Crock Rock · 28-02-2020 11:40pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

if the first 6 digits are the same then i have already described exactly what is happening as the same thing happens to me. Except in your case it is even easier to make a mistake.

X + = are all different characters so I was assuming they were all different numbers, ie no number repeated

ForestFire · 28-02-2020 11:52pm

Crock Rock wrote: »

X + = are all different characters so I was assuming they were all different numbers, ie no number repeated

Skipped through the latest posts, but I would think in general this should be the case, but would not be surprises if the X as part of the "area", "company" code (even though it is not used like this anymore), could possibly be the same as the second part + and = again, not that it really matters, because onle one number, that of the garda, needs to be similar....

Also not sure if someone ruled out a zero as the first number? But I have seen numbers that use the format 08X 0........

Crock Rock · 28-02-2020 11:54pm

ForestFire wrote: »

Skipped through the latest posts, but I would think in general this should be the case, but would not be surprises if the X as part of the "area", "company" code (even though it is not used like this anymore), could possibly be the same as the second part + and = again, not that it really matters, because onle one number, that of the garda, needs to be similar....

Also not sure if someone ruled out a zero as the first number? But I have seen numbers that use the format 08X 0........

Didn't cross my mind. Back to leaving cert probability for me

RobbieMD · 29-02-2020 12:37am

KWAG2019 wrote: »

AGS have previously been informed of issue. Issue persists. What steps have been taken by AGS? Have they given the correct number on a business card to people? Have they sent the number as a business card direct to phone of the person who needs it? There are simple steps here to solve this.

So who is disclosing data? Callers are leaving messages in good faith that that is a Garda number. AGS have knowledge of the problem and done nothing. Negligence. There is a start for GSOC. Why has AGS persisted with a number giving rise to data breaches and, horror of horrors, imagine a journalist hacked OP’s voicemail and an investigation, prosecution or trial was compromised? Tut tut.

There is a data breach occurring. I’d be inclined to report to Suped that it’s going to Data Commissioner. Let Super decide if they want to find out who’s responsible.

OP: check your tyres, tax, insurance. ðŸ˜‰

Your first paragraph in your post is full of speculation about what may or may not have happened. That’s impossible to comment on with any accuracy.

Regarding your second paragraph, if it was the Garda leaving voicemails then I could see an issue. Do you know the Garda has done nothing to resolve the issue? The op doesn’t mention that fact. Perhaps the number is online and people are just tapping it to ring when required. Perhaps the Garda isn’t aware the number is online, and as such it’s beyond his control. We could speculate all day long.

Is there a data breach if the person is volunteering their data? There is no suggestion so far that the Garda concerned has disclosed someone’s data.

If the op has a voicemail setup, I’d be inclined to make sure my message made it clear who I was.

heroics · 29-02-2020 12:50am

KWAG2019 wrote: »

AGS have previously been informed of issue. Issue persists. What steps have been taken by AGS? Have they given the correct number on a business card to people? Have they sent the number as a business card direct to phone of the person who needs it? There are simple steps here to solve this.

So who is disclosing data? Callers are leaving messages in good faith that that is a Garda number. AGS have knowledge of the problem and done nothing. Negligence. There is a start for GSOC. Why has AGS persisted with a number giving rise to data breaches and, horror of horrors, imagine a journalist hacked OP’s voicemail and an investigation, prosecution or trial was compromised? Tut tut.

There is a data breach occurring. I’d be inclined to report to Suped that it’s going to Data Commissioner. Let Super decide if they want to find out who’s responsible.

OP: check your tyres, tax, insurance. ðŸ˜‰

Complete rubbish

People misdial all the time. I get about 1 a month. I’ve learned so far the guy lives in Kilkenny cause the last one was a Dpd delivery guy calling about a package.

KWAG2019 · 29-02-2020 12:51am

heroics wrote: »

Complete rubbish

People misdial all the time. I get about 1 a month. I’ve learned so far the guy lives in Kilkenny cause the last one was a Dpd delivery guy calling about a package.

If you read the thread there’s a bit more to it. Good man.

prinzeugen · 29-02-2020 1:11am

bubblypop wrote: »

well what exactly you do you want?
you have no proof your number is being given out, my best guess is that people are misdialling, pretty easy to do when a number consists of a lot of the same number.

Eh... I am getting multiple calls from about 8-9 different places (as explained earlier) and now calls from members of the public.

Why would they be calling me otherwise?

Its not easy. You might put in one + more or one + less and the call wont connect then.

prinzeugen · 29-02-2020 1:17am

Deleted User wrote: »

Just block unknown numbers, no?

These are not unknown numbers. I never answer them anyway. If its important you get a voicemail.

Its numbers that show the number of the person that is calling that I have to answer. Work depends on it!

I can not afford to send every call from a number that I do not recognize to voicemail.

tuxy · 29-02-2020 1:18am

So what's the best solution if different individuals are dialing the wrong number by mistake?

ForestFire · 29-02-2020 1:20am

prinzeugen wrote: »

Its not easy. You might put in one + more ore one + less and the call wont connect then.

But its not your number they are miss dialling, so this makes no sense.

It's some other number they are miss dialling and they are likely adding an extra + to this other number plus dialling 1 digit more than needed that will be ignored.

Someone gave an example earlier in the thread of how this could easily happen and get your number.

heroics · 29-02-2020 1:26am

KWAG2019 wrote: »

If you read the thread there’s a bit more to it. Good man.

No there isn’t. The op assumes that a Garda is handing out their number. He has no proof other than he gets loads of calls. He has said his number is an easy number to remember. Maybe the Garda number is similiar and it’s just human error as has been pointed out a number of times.

No gdpr/data breach etc. What exactly does he expect the super/gsoc/data commissioner to do? Change the gardas no so it’s not like the OPs? Ring everyone who makes the mistake and tell them not to do it again?

tuxy · 29-02-2020 1:28am

heroics wrote: »

No gdpr/data breach etc. What exactly does he expect the super/gsoc/data commissioner to do? Change the gardas no so it’s not like the OPs? Ring everyone who makes the mistake and tell them not to do it again?

Yes this is eactly what he believes should happen.

heroics · 29-02-2020 1:29am

tuxy wrote: »

Yes this is eactly what he believes should happen.

best of luck with that

prinzeugen · 29-02-2020 1:35am

ForestFire wrote: »

But its not your number they are miss dialling, so this makes no sense.

It's some other number they are miss dialling and they are likely adding an extra + to this other number plus dialling 1 digit more than needed that will be ignored.

Someone gave an example earlier in the thread of how this could easily happen and get your number.

I never said that they are dialing my number wrong. I am saying that this Garda is giving people my number not theirs...

Put it this way. Either the Garda is giving out their number wrong or 10 people a week cant dial for ****.

Fann Linn · 29-02-2020 1:37am

heroics wrote: »

No there isn’t. The op assumes that a Garda is handing out their number. He has no proof other than he gets loads of calls. He has said his number is an easy number to remember. Maybe the Garda number is similiar and it’s just human error as has been pointed out a number of times.

No gdpr/data breach etc. What exactly does he expect the super/gsoc/data commissioner to do? Change the gardas no so it’s not like the OPs? Ring everyone who makes the mistake and tell them not to do it again?

When I'm looking for online insurance quotes and a phone no is required I normally just change my 08 prefix to a competitor and fill in the rest with my number.
Can't be ar$ed answering everyone from AA to Zurich the next day so just pass them off elsewhere.

RobbieMD · 29-02-2020 1:41am

prinzeugen wrote: »

I never said that they are dialing my number wrong. I am saying that this Garda is giving people my number not theirs...

Put it this way. Either the Garda is giving out their number wrong or 10 people a week cant dial for ****.

I can’t believe a Garda would be giving out his number incorrectly.

A third possibility is that the number is listed somewhere incorrectly.

Quantum Erasure · 29-02-2020 1:56am

prinzeugen wrote: »

I never said that they are dialing my number wrong. I am saying that this Garda is giving people my number not theirs...

Put it this way. Either the Garda is giving out their number wrong or 10 people a week cant dial for ****.

your number is easy to remember, maybe the Guards is easy to forget?

KWAG2019 · 29-02-2020 2:31am

RobbieMD wrote: »

Your first paragraph in your post is full of speculation about what may or may not have happened. That’s impossible to comment on with any accuracy.

I said in my first paragraph:AGS have previously been informed of issue. Issue persists.
OP said in his very first post:

prinzeugen wrote: »

As The title says, a member of the Garda keeps giving my mobile to people rather than their own.....I posted here before about a voicemail that contained specific details about a case and contacted the station that this Garda was based and was promised it would not happen again....Obviously speaking to them didn't work {

My first paragraph starts with a restatement of the claims by OP. I am not speculating.
I continue with questions about whether the AGS took some simple steps to solve the problem and give examples. I make it very obvious by saying "there are simple steps to solve this". I didn't speculate that the Gardai had sat on their arses, had a laugh, played pool. I asked what steps they might have taken. That's why I used question marks. Your assertion about my first paragraph is simply lazy reading and an absence of thought.

RobbieMD wrote: »

Regarding your second paragraph, if it was the Garda leaving voicemails then I could see an issue. Do you know the Garda has done nothing to resolve the issue? The op doesn’t mention that fact.

What I do know, continuing to take OP at face value, is that the problem persists. I never claimed that AGS had done nothing so asking me about whether the garda had done anything is simply doing what I did in the first paragraph i.e. ask what steps to solve the thing had been done. The issue is very clear: there is a data breach and possibly, note possibly, depending on the information left on voicemail, a prosecution compromised. That's why I made the point about that information getting to a wider audience. Any responsible Super would see the issue immediately.

RobbieMD wrote: »

Perhaps the number is online and people are just tapping it to ring when required. Perhaps the Garda isn’t aware the number is online, and as such it’s beyond his control. We could speculate all day long.

Speculation. Off with you.

RobbieMD wrote: »

Is there a data breach if the person is volunteering their data? There is no suggestion so far that the Garda concerned has disclosed someone’s data.

That's not the point. The point is that confidential personal information is being sent to the wrong phone by people who believe it is a Garda number after AGS were alerted to the problem. The Garda Code of Ethics P. 17 points to the importance of managing information carefully. https://www.garda.ie/en/about-us/publications/policy-documents/code-of-ethics-english-1-5-18.pdf It's not enough to say that the Garda isn't doing it himself: they have been alerted to a problem with their collection of sensitive information and taking OP at face value have not solved the problem.

RobbieMD wrote: »

If the op has a voicemail setup, I’d be inclined to make sure my message made it clear who I was.

A good practical suggestion.

The real solution to this is of course written complaint and involvement of Data Protection Commissioner first. Let them handle it. I suspect once AGS hear of that problem it will be sorted quickly.

twowheelsonly · 29-02-2020 2:52am

bubblypop wrote: »

It's no problem to the guards, they are not getting people calling them by mistake, the OP is. & it is clearly giving him some distress......

Data protection breach, lol
Clearly people are misdialling. I don't know how anyone thinks anything else!

Maybe the Guards / Garda IS getting people calling them by mistake as well...

OP... Ask the callers what number they're trying to ring. Either that or ring your own number using different pre-fixes to see if a Garda owns any of those phones.

cursai · 29-02-2020 3:12am

maybe the guard has great confidence that YOU will solve the case.

prinzeugen · 29-02-2020 3:27am

twowheelsonly wrote: »

Maybe the Guards / Garda IS getting people calling them by mistake as well...

OP... Ask the callers what number they're trying to ring. Either that or ring your own number using different pre-fixes to see if a Garda owns any of those phones.

They are trying to ring my number.. When you join a doctor or a club for the kids, a parent gives a contact number. You write it in ink on paper.

This is not just Garda stuff I am getting calls about. Its stuff to do with this persons mother, kids, eye tests, schools, house sales and rent on a current property. I said that in the OP.

I know everything about this Garda other than their name! I ignored it.

I am going to write a letter (registered) to the SUP of that station.

If the calls persist then I will go down the other routes as suggested here.
Personal details - Data Protection Commissioner

Garda Stuff - GSOC.

And to the guys trying to work out my mobile. Even if you get to 5.. you will be wrong. I am not that stupid!

twowheelsonly · 29-02-2020 3:47am

prinzeugen wrote: »

They are trying to ring my number.. When you join a doctor or a club for the kids, a parent gives a contact number. You write it in ink on paper.

This is not just Garda stuff I am getting calls about. Its stuff to do with this persons mother, kids, eye tests, schools, house sales and rent on a current property. I said that in the OP.

I know everything about this Garda other than their name! I ignored it.

I am going to write a letter (registered) to the SUP of that station.

If the calls persist then I will go down the other routes as suggested here.
Personal details - Data Protection Commissioner

Garda Stuff - GSOC.

So these people are having full blown conversations with you and you still don't know who they're looking for ??

99 times out of a hundred if I ring someone I start by using their name. If it's the wrong person they tend to tell me straight away, not head into details about their rent or their latest criminal enterprise.

99 times out of a hundred when I get calls people start by saying my name. If they've dialed a wrong number then we usually establish that before they get to tell me about their granny, their dog or the price of their house.

I dialed wrong numbers and I've received calls from mis-dialed numbers and I'd imagine that most people have. Inevitably they're cut short before all the juicy details come out ... Strange that the same doesn't seem to happen with yourself !!

cursai · 29-02-2020 6:22am

twowheelsonly wrote: »

So these people are having full blown conversations with you and you still don't know who they're looking for ??

99 times out of a hundred if I ring someone I start by using their name. If it's the wrong person they tend to tell me straight away, not head into details about their rent or their latest criminal enterprise.

99 times out of a hundred when I get calls people start by saying my name. If they've dialed a wrong number then we usually establish that before they get to tell me about their granny, their dog or the price of their house.

I dialed wrong numbers and I've received calls from mis-dialed numbers and I'd imagine that most people have. Inevitably they're cut short before all the juicy details come out ... Strange that the same doesn't seem to happen with yourself !!

All great detectives hold their peace.

29-02-2020 8:38am

So everyone that rings for this Guard doesn't use his name? Rubbish. Particularly if they are leaving voice mails.
It's actually funny that you believe your number is so easy to remember that someone can't ring you by mistake!

lunamoon · 29-02-2020 9:49am

Is there anyway you could get the Garda's real number and give it out when you are called incorrectly? Our home phone number had a digit different to a Chinese takeaway. Friday night's in our house were fun

We just gave out the correct number.

KWAG2019 · 29-02-2020 10:06am

I look forward to hearing from OP as to the outcome of this situation.

prinzeugen · 29-02-2020 10:07am

twowheelsonly wrote: »

So these people are having full blown conversations with you and you still don't know who they're looking for ??

99 times out of a hundred if I ring someone I start by using their name. If it's the wrong person they tend to tell me straight away, not head into details about their rent or their latest criminal enterprise.

99 times out of a hundred when I get calls people start by saying my name. If they've dialed a wrong number then we usually establish that before they get to tell me about their granny, their dog or the price of their house.

I dialed wrong numbers and I've received calls from mis-dialed numbers and I'd imagine that most people have. Inevitably they're cut short before all the juicy details come out ... Strange that the same doesn't seem to happen with yourself !!

Do you think I am stupid enough to post stuff here? Out of all the replies to my OP only one or two have answered my question so thank you.

ebbsy · 29-02-2020 10:16am

Get a solicitor.

I think there might be a few bob in this.

Peintre Celebre · 29-02-2020 10:35am

prinzeugen wrote: »

They are trying to ring my number.. When you join a doctor or a club for the kids, a parent gives a contact number. You write it in ink on paper.

This is not just Garda stuff I am getting calls about. Its stuff to do with this persons mother, kids, eye tests, schools, house sales and rent on a current property. I said that in the OP.

I know everything about this Garda other than their name! I ignored it.

I am going to write a letter (registered) to the SUP of that station.

If the calls persist then I will go down the other routes as suggested here.
Personal details - Data Protection Commissioner

Garda Stuff - GSOC.

And to the guys trying to work out my mobile. Even if you get to 5.. you will be wrong. I am not that stupid!

There is something strange about this scenario. A Garda does not give out their own personal number nevermind to every second person as it appears to be here

Btw how do you not know their name if all these people are contacting you?

KWAG2019 · 29-02-2020 11:22am

Peintre Celebre wrote: »

There is something strange about this scenario. A Garda does not give out their own personal number nevermind to every second person as it appears to be here

Btw how do you not know their name if all these people are contacting you?

Hence the caveats that for the purposes of the thread the OP is taken at face value.

listermint · 29-02-2020 11:31am

prinzeugen wrote: »

Do you think I am stupid enough to post stuff here? Out of all the replies to my OP only one or two have answered my question so thank you.

..... Out of all the replies to this thread there has been one person who agrees with me.... Thank you

Says it all

RobbieMD · 29-02-2020 11:34am

KWAG2019 wrote: »

I said in my first paragraph:AGS have previously been informed of issue. Issue persists.
OP said in his very first post:

My first paragraph starts with a restatement of the claims by OP. I am not speculating.
I continue with questions about whether the AGS took some simple steps to solve the problem and give examples. I make it very obvious by saying "there are simple steps to solve this". I didn't speculate that the Gardai had sat on their arses, had a laugh, played pool. I asked what steps they might have taken. That's why I used question marks. Your assertion about my first paragraph is simply lazy reading and an absence of thought.

What I do know, continuing to take OP at face value, is that the problem persists. I never claimed that AGS had done nothing so asking me about whether the garda had done anything is simply doing what I did in the first paragraph i.e. ask what steps to solve the thing had been done. The issue is very clear: there is a data breach and possibly, note possibly, depending on the information left on voicemail, a prosecution compromised. That's why I made the point about that information getting to a wider audience. Any responsible Super would see the issue immediately.

Speculation. Off with you.

That's not the point. The point is that confidential personal information is being sent to the wrong phone by people who believe it is a Garda number after AGS were alerted to the problem. The Garda Code of Ethics P. 17 points to the importance of managing information carefully. https://www.garda.ie/en/about-us/publications/policy-documents/code-of-ethics-english-1-5-18.pdf It's not enough to say that the Garda isn't doing it himself: they have been alerted to a problem with their collection of sensitive information and taking OP at face value have not solved the problem.

A good practical suggestion.

The real solution to this is of course written complaint and involvement of Data Protection Commissioner first. Let them handle it. I suspect once AGS hear of that problem it will be sorted quickly.

Your first paragraph was speculation about how the number became available by business card. Is that not speculation? You were the first to raise that as a means of the phone number becoming available.

Do you expect AGS to publish nationwide the phone number and ask people not to ring it? What are the simple steps that AGS can take to resolve it? Should the Garda be made change his number? If so, why should he and not the op?

We don’t know what steps have been taken. As we’re speculating, perhaps the Garda has changed his number and the old number is on some online page that he neither knows about or has control over. Perhaps AGS have self reported to the Data commissioner. Or perhaps the Garda is doing it to wind the op up, but he must’nt mind missing a tonne of calls and voicemails.

The Garda code of ethics? Really, you’re clutching at straws here. The garda is not disclosing anyone’s information. He is not responsible for the actions of others. There was an issue with Gardai not signing the code of ethics when the latest Commisioner brought it in. Perhaps he isn’t signed up to it? Can he be made comply with a code he didn’t sign up to?

When you said
“OP: check your tyres, tax, insurance “ that told me everything I need to know about you.

Rushden · 29-02-2020 11:34am

Peintre Celebre wrote: »

There is something strange about this scenario. A Garda does not give out their own personal number nevermind to every second person as it appears to be here

Btw how do you not know their name if all these people are contacting you?

This ^^^^

A guard isn't going handing out their personal number to loads of members of the public. Also you don't know his name but somehow know what station he's from. Between that and your number being "impossible" to mix up with another none of this makes sense

rom · 29-02-2020 11:36am

Just change the voicemail to "Hello and welcome to Irish psychics live. Call costs Euro 3.45 per minute. However if you are just looking for X X please leave a message"

I get similar in my email. My email is a very easy to remember one. Its my first initial and second name @ a bit email provider. So I have got hotel booking, crazy NSFW pictures from stag parties, questions to some college lecture and the best one was the results from an STD screening (they passed) I probably get one once a month at this stage.

KWAG2019 · 29-02-2020 11:57am

RobbieMD wrote: »

Your first paragraph was speculation about how the number became available by business card. Is that not speculation? You were the first to raise that as a means of the phone number becoming available.

Do you expect AGS to publish nationwide the phone number and ask people not to ring it? What are the simple steps that AGS can take to resolve it? Should the Garda be made change his number? If so, why should he and not the op?

We don’t know what steps have been taken. As we’re speculating, perhaps the Garda has changed his number and the old number is on some online page that he neither knows about or has control over. Perhaps AGS have self reported to the Data commissioner. Or perhaps the Garda is doing it to wind the op up, but he must’nt mind missing a tonne of calls and voicemails.

The Garda code of ethics? Really, you’re clutching at straws here. The garda is not disclosing anyone’s information. He is not responsible for the actions of others. There was an issue with Gardai not signing the code of ethics when the latest Commisioner brought it in. Perhaps he isn’t signed up to it? Can he be made comply with a code he didn’t sign up to?

When you said
“OP: check your tyres, tax, insurance “ that told me everything I need to know about you.

This is indicative that you haven’t understood the points I’m making. You simply don’t get it.

ForestFire · 29-02-2020 1:21pm

I'll post this again because not really sure op and others are getting it.

OP confirmed his number is as below.

08X +++ +++=

OP also has no direct evidence that he shared on this thread that the garda is giving the ops number out, except for the large amount of calls he receives.

So let's say his number is as below to make it easier to understand.

087 888 8889

Now if the gardas number is any of the below, it is easy for the average intelligent public to make mistakes.

Garda number--087 888 8895 (last digit could be any number)
Mistake- 087 888 88895 (last digit ignored when dialling)

Garda number - 085 888 8889
Mistake - 087 888 8889 (087 prefix habit with some people)

In fact with the high number of repeating 8's, in this example, mistakes are even easier than if you had a complex number.

Also some more possibilities below with spaces removed for extra confusion.

OP - 0877777776
G - 0877777767

OP - 0871111112
G - 0871111121

KWAG2019 · 29-02-2020 4:15pm

The OPs predicament (and let’s all accept that we are taking it at face value here) is that he is repeatedly ending up in possession of personal information of a member of AGS, of sensitive information in relation to the activities of AGS and that despite complaint and assurance that it would be sorted, it persists.

Legally he can raise the issue with DPC, possibly GSOC. How they would react remains to be seen.

What interests me at this stage is the legal status of information which you come into possession of by others actions but is not something you have legal access to normally.
So if medical records are found in landfill, placed there by error who owns them? Or if OP was a journalist and received info on an ongoing high profile case in this way could he use it for an exclusive? If info is voluntarily placed in my possession but by error what rights of use and ownership have I, if any?

Garda keeps giving my phone number out and not there own.

Comments