NEW QUESTION 130
SCENARIO
Please use the following to answer the next question:
Jason, a long-time customer of ABC insurance, was involved in a minor car accident a few months ago.
Although no one was hurt, Jason has been plagued by texts and calls from a company called Erbium Insurance offering to help him recover compensation for personal injury. Jason has heard about insurance companies selling customers’ data to third parties, and he’s convinced that Erbium must have gotten his information from ABC.
Jason has also been receiving an increased amount of marketing information from ABC, trying to sell him their full range of their insurance policies.
Perturbed by this, Jason has started looking at price comparison sites on the Internet and has been shocked to find that other insurers offer much cheaper rates than ABC, even though he has been a loyal customer for many years. When his ABC policy comes up for renewal, he decides to switch to Xentron Insurance.
In order to activate his new insurance policy, Jason needs to supply Xentron with information about his No Claims bonus, his vehicle and his driving history. After researching his rights under the GDPR, he writes to ask ABC to transfer his information directly to Xentron. He also takes this opportunity to ask ABC to stop using his personal data for marketing purposes.
ABC supplies Jason with a PDF and XML (Extensible Markup Language) versions of his No Claims Certificate, but tells Jason it cannot transfer his data directly to Xentron at this is not technically feasible. ABC also explains that Jason’s contract included a provision whereby Jason agreed that his data could be used for marketing purposes; according to ABC, it is too late for Jason to change his mind about this. It angers Jason when he recalls the wording of the contract, which was filled with legal jargon and very confusing.
In the meantime, Jason is still receiving unwanted calls from Erbium Insurance. He writes to Erbium to ask for the name of the organization that supplied his details to them. He warns Erbium that he plans to complain to the data protection authority because he thinks their company has been using his data unlawfully. His letter states that he does not want his data being used by them in any way.
Erbium’s response letter confirms Jason’s suspicions. Erbium is ABC’s wholly owned subsidiary, and they received information about Jason’s accident from ABC shortly after Jason submitted his accident claim. Erbium assures Jason that there has been no breach of the GDPR, as Jason’s contract included a provision in which he agreed to share his information with ABC’s affiliates for business purposes.
Jason is disgusted by the way in which he has been treated by ABC, and writes to them insisting that all his information be erased from their computer system.
After Jason has exercised his right to restrict the use of his data, under what conditions would Erbium have grounds for refusing to comply?
