Contents

1. Summary
   1. Facts
   2. Holding
2. Comment
3. Further resources
4. The Decision

Summary

The ODPC dismissed a claim by a woman (the ‘Complainant’) who claimed that her right to rectification had been infringed upon by a telco (the ‘Respondent’). This was proved to be untrue.

Facts

The Complainant who had an ongoing case against the Respondent in a court of law, requested for stamped copies of her mpesa statements. The Respondent sent her the statement but it was later found to be missing a full page of transactions.

The Complainant requested for updated statements and alleged that the page was later sent to her separately and without an official stamp on it by the Respondent. The Complainant averred that she intended to rely on the statements in a claim against the Respondent in the small claims court and the delay, the incorrect statement and lack of an official stamp, made her lose the case against the Respondent. She alleged foul play.

The Complainant was asked on several occassions by the ODPC to produce the full judgement of the court to back up her claim but did not do so. The ODPC later got the court ruling using other channels.

The Respondent confirmed that a technical hitch prevented the full statement from being printed out the first time. The Respondent averred that it later corrected the problem and re-issued stamped statements to the Complainant even as they informed her of the automated self-service option accessible via a short code. They therefore averred that they fully facilitated the Complainant's access request. The DPA held that:

• The Complainant's case was not impacted or otherwise compromised by the missing statement.
• The Respondent relied on the statements in the court case which confirms that they were availed to her.
• The Respondent did not infringe upon the data subjects right to rectification as the statements were duly corrected after being flagged as inaccurate.

The claim was dismissed.

Comment

A full text of the ruling is provided below. The Complainant appears to be abusing the process of the DPA.

Further resources