HDPA (Greece) - 25/2023

HDPA - 1510/12-06-2023
Authority:	HDPA (Greece)
Jurisdiction:	Greece
Relevant Law:	Article 5(1) GDPR Article 5(2) GDPR Article 15 GDPR Article 25(1) GDPR
Type:	Complaint
Outcome:	Upheld
Started:	13.12.2022
Decided:	12.06.2023
Published:	27.07.2023
Fine:	100.000 EUR
Parties:	n/a
National Case Number/Name:	1510/12-06-2023
European Case Law Identifier:	n/a
Appeal:	n/a
Original Language(s):	Greek
Original Source:	HDPA (in EL)
Initial Contributor:	ANASTASIA TSERMENIDOU

The Greek DPA issued a fine of 100 000 EUR to a bank for unlawful processing of personal data and breach of right of access.

English Summary

Facts

Piraeus Bank S.A., the controller, sent the data subject a letter informing them that it had entrusted the management of loans and/or credits related claims to a credit management company (AFS), a wholly owned subsidiary of the bank. The letter also informed that the data subject was a party to a claim and that their personal data had been transmitted to the AFS which was managing the claim.

The data subject submitted an access request to the controller but wanot satisfied with the answer they received. Then they filed a complaint with the Hellenic DPA, arguing that the controller had no legal basis for sharing their personal data as they were not a party to any loan or credit related claims with the bank. Moreover, they argued that the controller did not provide them with sufficient information after the acess request under Article 15 GDPR.

On the basis of the information available to date, no transfer of the data of the above-mentioned persons to the Loan and Credit Claims Management Company has occurred (the Bank proceeded, in accordance with the provisions of Law 4354/2015 as in force, an agreement to entrust the management of its receivables from loans/credit to debtors whose debts had become fully or partially due and/or terminated or settled to the Loan and Credit Claims Management Company).

The HDPA stated that she expressly reserves the right to exercise its powers in this regard in the future, given that the general audit is ongoing and has not yet been completed. Finally, the HDPA has found that the complainant's right of access has not been respected.

Holding

The Greek DPA found that the controller processed personal data of the data subject and of a large number of its customers in breach of the lawfulness principle. It also held that the controller did not put in place enough measures to ensure that only the data necessary for a specific purpose were processed, violating the principles of data protection by design.

The HDPA held that the Bank had not taken the appropriate technical and organisational measures measures and did not have the appropriate procedures in place to ensure that the creation of the list of its customers with debts in question was drawn up in accordance with proper systemic configure. Moreover that the high degree of responsibility owns the Bank in relation to the absence of technical and organisational measures.

Comment

Share your comments here!

Further Resources

Share blogs or news articles here!

English Machine Translation of the Decision

The decision below is a machine translation of the Greek original. Please refer to the Greek original for more details.

Summary
The Authority found that the complained bank processed the personal data of the complainant and a large number of its customers in violation of the principle of legality and, moreover, without having taken appropriate and effective technical and organizational measures so that only the data that they are necessary to serve a specific purpose, thus violating the principles of legality of processing and data protection by design.

With the information available to date, there has been no transmission of the data of the above persons to the Loan and Credit Receivables Management Company. The Authority expressly reserves the right to exercise its powers in relation to this particular issue in the future, given that the overall audit is ongoing and not yet complete.

Finally, the Authority established the non-satisfaction of the complainant's right of access.