Management Co. posting defaulters list, how legal?

It would hardly be illegal if those involved sign away some or all of their rights under data protection legislation - which is a regular feature of bank loan agreements, for instance.
 
If as a shareholder in a management company you have paid your service charge and certain work cannot be completed due to lack of funds (because others have not paid) are you entitled to see who has paid and who has not contributed by requesting a copy of the debtors list from the managing company?

I would imagine that you would be entitled to have such information?
 
ubiquitous said:
It would hardly be illegal if those involved sign away some or all of their rights under data protection legislation - which is a regular feature of bank loan agreements, for instance.
Click to expand...

I could be wrong but surely your solicitor would point this out when you were purchasing the property. Signing away any right is significant and would be mentioned.
I met our management agent some months back in my capacity as treasurer of our committee and she actually had the list of defaulters but would not under any circumstances show it to me even after we had a few drinks.
My own opinion is the names should be published. Essentially all owners are shareholders in the management company. In any company the "partners" are entitled to know if one of them has not inputted their share or is taking the company for a ride so as such this is not private information.
 
The Data Protection answer given depends on what question was asked.
Can the Management company publish? Depends on where and how. And if it is to other members and shareholders, I say yes, they can publish. Otherwise it makes no sense -how else does the Management Company function if members cannot be told who has paid and who has not.

mf
 
KalEl said:
I could be wrong but surely your solicitor would point this out when you were purchasing the property. Signing away any right is significant and would be mentioned.
Click to expand...

I would look at this another way. The householder has certain rights under Data Protection legislation. They also have certain rights to have their interests protected by the management company. If the effect of data protection law was to hamper the management company in doing its job in protecting the members interests, it could surely be argued that the latter rights outweigh the former.
 
This is a very interesting discussion. There are many conflicting interests and rights. We only have one conclusive statement so far from the DPC from the original poster. Im not sure what question was asked. I have sent a written query to the office of the DPC and will post both query and answer here when/if i get a response.
 

What do they mean by publish. We are not talking about putting an advert in the Irish Times. So as a shareholder in a company, am I not entitled to walk into Accounts and ask a list of debtors or publish them in the annual accounts?
 
All,

Question put to Data Comm people this morning was:

"Can the Management C'tee send a list by way of letter to all of the apt. owners stating that there are a number of apt owners who still have not paid their fees? This letter would either outline the names and addresses of the defaulters or just the addresses. It would also outline that the reason some necessary works have not been carried out is partly because of this"

Answer no, under the Data Protection Act S2(1)d. Which in itself is vague but apparently broad enough that any one of the defaulters would have the right to legally challenge the Management Co. for release of information relating to them.
 
S2(1) of the DATA PROTECTION (AMENDMENT) ACT 2003 reads as follows [broken link removed] (S2(1)d in bold)


I don't think that failure to pay a (non-statutory) debt could be interpreted in any way as being "the commission or alleged commission of (an) offence"

I would therefore question whether the advice you received is correct.
 
To say that you have the right to legally challenge ...this is pretty vague!!!! People have the right to legally challenge anything they like ! That doesnt in itself say whether they have any basis under the legislation for a successful case?
 
Ubiquitous/All,

Appears maybe conflciting info,this is what I was directed to (step-by-step may I add) on their website:

[You have certain key responsibilities in relation to the information which you keep on computer or in a structured manual file about individuals. These may be summarised in terms of eight "Rules" which you must follow, and which are listed below. Click on the links to see more information

"appropriate security measures shall be taken against unauthorised access to, or unauthorised alteration, disclosure or destruction of, the data, in particular where the processing involves the transmission of data over a network, and against all other unlawful forms of processing"
- section 2(1)(d) of the Act

The security of personal information is all-important. It will be more significant in some situations than in others, depending on such matters as confidentiality and sensitivity. High standards of security are, nevertheless, essential for all personal information. Both "data controllers" and "data processors" must meet the requirement to keep data secure.]

??????
 

I have been told that I am contractually obliged to pay my management fee - whether or not the management company are providing the service they are supposed to.

Therefore, by not paying I am apparently in breach of contract - is that not therefore an offence of some kind or other?
 
All this reminds me of the time a parish priest published a list of people who did not contribute to the church. Shamed a few into paying.
 
Mers1 said:
... Data Comm's office who confirmed that Mangagement Companies are not enititled to publish this type of information; be it the name and address of the default apartments or just the address.
Click to expand...
Just out of curiosity, are the Management companies allowed to publish the names of those who DID pay?
 
bond-007 said:
All this reminds me of the time a parish priest published a list of people who did not contribute to the church. Shamed a few into paying.
Click to expand...
Not really the same thing since the parishioners would not have had a legal contract with the church.
 
bond-007 said:
All this reminds me of the time a parish priest published a list of people who did not contribute to the church. Shamed a few into paying.
Click to expand...

I have seen the COI (in the days before the data protection act, but could still be done) send a list to all parish members of what each family paid during the year. Now that Pope is German, is may only be a length of time before Parish Priest the lecturing his parishioners on the important of donating their 10% of earning each week.
 
Brillant TigerTree - ask those who did pay to sign that their names can be published plus their house/apartment no. Those who have paid would be happy to do so particularly as they would be annoyed that work was not done due to defaulters and based on that list everybody would know who did not pay.
 
ronan_d_john said:
Therefore, by not paying I am apparently in breach of contract - is that not therefore an offence of some kind or other?
Click to expand...

No - breach of contract in this instance would surely fall under the remit of civil law. Failure to pay a trade debt for example is not in itself a criminal offence.

I think this is an excellent solution,
 

I think that the question to the Data Protection Commissioners was framed incorrectly. According to the information contained in your question, it is not possible for the DPC to know whether or not the apartment owners have any connection with the management company other than as customers.

The correct way to phrase the question to the DPC might be:

"Can the Management Company (or any company) provide the names and addresses of debtors to its own owners?"

I dare say that the answer will be "yes". Think about it, the Management Company is usually owned by the apartment owners, so they are one in the same thing - the management company by circulating the debtors list to itself (i.e. the owners) is regarded as internal circulation within an organisation. It is not "publishing" or giving the information to third parties outside the organisation.

The impression given by your question is that the management company may be circulating debtors details outside its own ownership (which is technically possible if the management company is not owned by the apartment owners).
 
The last post is well written and logical. I would like to see if it holds weight though? Does anyone agree? It sounds incredible that a company could not let its owners/shareholders know who owes them money?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register