| Authority: | ODPC - Kenya |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction: | Kenya |
| Relevant law: | Section 26(a), 37, 65 of the Data Protection Act, 2019; Regulation 14(1), 15(1)(d) of the Data Protection (General) Regulations; Regulation 14(2) of the Enforcement Regulations; Article 31 of the Constitution of Kenya |
| Type: | Complaint |
| Outcome: | Violation |
| Started: | 4 March 2024 |
| Decided: | 31 May 2024 |
| Published: | Yes |
| Fine: | KES.650,000/- |
| Parties: | Victor Owino vs. Mhasibu Housing Company Ltd & Mhasibu NWDT Sacco Society Ltd |
| Case No.: | 371 of 2024 |
| Appeal: | N/A |
| Original Source: | ODPC |
| Original contributor: | MZIZI Africa |
Mhasibu Housing Company Ltd was ordered to pay the Complainant KES 650,000 for using his personal data for commercial purposes without his consent and for failing to inform him of how his personal data would be used, which is a violation of the law. Additionally, the ODPC issued an enforcement notice against the company.
Mhasibu Housing Company Ltd (the ”1st Respondent”) is a Savings and Credit Co-operative Society focused on the acquisition of housing for its members and Mhasibu NWDT Sacco Society Ltd (the “2nd Respondent”) is a Savings and Credit Co-operative Society focused on investments generally.
The Complainant alleged that he subscribed as a member of the 2nd Respondent in 2019 and left the same in 2022. He also alleged that his deceased father was a member of the 1st Defendant prior to his death, and in the course of his membership, he acquired some property through the 1st Respondent. The Complainant averred that he had since sought to follow up on his deceased father's incestments as a beneficiary, but notwithstanding having completed that transaction, his details were still being retained by the Respondents.
The Complainant now alleged that he had been automatically subscribed to the membership of the 1st Respondent without his knowledge or understanding.
The Complainant also alleged that he was now receiving calls, texts and marketing communication from the 1st Respondent notwithstanding his lack of membership. The communication material the subject of the complaint was sent through a mail service SendGrid an international company, to many recipients using the copy function, leaving the recipients email addresses on full display.
The Complainant provided proof of the email and WhatsApp communication and raised the following issues against the Respondents severally and each of them, for determination: