B.T. call records

Anyone know how long B.T. keep records of incoming calls to one's
phone(ie. the outgoing record of the caller)?.
May these records of incoming calls be given to the recipient of the
calls without some kind of Court/Police order?.
Thanks for any info.,
Hartly.

hartly wrote:
> Anyone know how long B.T. keep records of incoming calls to one's
> phone(ie. the outgoing record of the caller)?.

Potentially for years.

> May these records of incoming calls be given to the recipient of the
> calls without some kind of Court/Police order?.

No.

Wireless Reader wrote:

> hartly wrote:
>
>> Anyone know how long B.T. keep records of incoming calls to one's
>> phone(ie. the outgoing record of the caller)?.
>
>
> Potentially for years.
>
>> May these records of incoming calls be given to the recipient of the
>> calls without some kind of Court/Police order?.
>
>
> No.

Data Subject access request?

BTW: I'm sure BTopenzone really love you using their address in postings

"Wireless Reader" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> hartly wrote:
>> Anyone know how long B.T. keep records of incoming calls to one's
>> phone(ie. the outgoing record of the caller)?.
>
> Potentially for years.
>
>> May these records of incoming calls be given to the recipient of the
>> calls without some kind of Court/Police order?.
>
> No.

Why, given that this information is available (albeit transiently) to the
recipient of the calls if he dials 1471.

I'd have thought that the sender and recipient of the calls would both be
entitled to see their outgoing/incoming call history since it relates to
them. I can understand a court order being needed for anyone other than
either of the call parties to see the list.

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 21:14:56 +0100, Martyn Dewar
<martyn._nospam-remove_dewar@_nospam-remove_zen.co.uk> wrote:

>Wireless Reader wrote:
>
>> hartly wrote:
>>
>>> Anyone know how long B.T. keep records of incoming calls to one's
>>> phone(ie. the outgoing record of the caller)?.
>>
>>
>> Potentially for years.
>>
>>> May these records of incoming calls be given to the recipient of the
>>> calls without some kind of Court/Police order?.
>>
>>
>> No.
>
>Data Subject access request?
>

Doesn't apply unless the caller is not identifiable (which would make
them rather pointless).

--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
I'm a nobody, nobody is perfect, therefore I'm perfect.

To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

Alex Heney wrote:

<SNIP>

>>
>>Data Subject access request?
>>
>
>
> Doesn't apply unless the caller is not identifiable (which would make
> them rather pointless).
>

Surely for the purposes of obtaining a list of incoming calls it would
be applicable?

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 21:26:05 +0100, "Martin Underwood"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>"Wireless Reader" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> hartly wrote:
>>> Anyone know how long B.T. keep records of incoming calls to one's
>>> phone(ie. the outgoing record of the caller)?.
>>
>> Potentially for years.
>>
>>> May these records of incoming calls be given to the recipient of the
>>> calls without some kind of Court/Police order?.
>>
>> No.
>
>Why, given that this information is available (albeit transiently) to the
>recipient of the calls if he dials 1471.
>

Only if the caller does not withhold their number.

>I'd have thought that the sender and recipient of the calls would both be
>entitled to see their outgoing/incoming call history since it relates to
>them.

The DPA only allows access to data relating to you if it doesn't also
relate to any other identifiable individual who has not given their
permission for release of the data.


--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
I'm a nobody, nobody is perfect, therefore I'm perfect.

To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 22:46:11 +0100, [Alex Heney] said :-

>On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 21:14:56 +0100, Martyn Dewar
><martyn._nospam-remove_dewar@_nospam-remove_zen.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>Wireless Reader wrote:
>>
>>> hartly wrote:
>>>
>>>> Anyone know how long B.T. keep records of incoming calls to one's
>>>> phone(ie. the outgoing record of the caller)?.
>>>
>>>
>>> Potentially for years.
>>>
>>>> May these records of incoming calls be given to the recipient of the
>>>> calls without some kind of Court/Police order?.
>>>
>>>
>>> No.
>>
>>Data Subject access request?
>>
>
>Doesn't apply unless the caller is not identifiable (which would make
>them rather pointless).

Of course it applies Slick.

Unless the user has explicit reason to use the bt.com domain, the mail
servers of that domain has to handle any bounces or indeed mail
checks.

"Alex Heney" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 21:26:05 +0100, "Martin Underwood"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>"Wireless Reader" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> hartly wrote:
>>>> Anyone know how long B.T. keep records of incoming calls to one's
>>>> phone(ie. the outgoing record of the caller)?.
>>>
>>> Potentially for years.
>>>
>>>> May these records of incoming calls be given to the recipient of the
>>>> calls without some kind of Court/Police order?.
>>>
>>> No.
>>
>>Why, given that this information is available (albeit transiently) to the
>>recipient of the calls if he dials 1471.
>
> Only if the caller does not withhold their number.
>
>>I'd have thought that the sender and recipient of the calls would both be
>>entitled to see their outgoing/incoming call history since it relates to
>>them.
>
> The DPA only allows access to data relating to you if it doesn't also
> relate to any other identifiable individual who has not given their
> permission for release of the data.

However presumably a list of all calls with dates/times and with numbers
*where not withheld* would be permissible: if you don't withhold your number
you are implicitly permitting it to be revealed to the recipient in this
list in the same way as it is for 1471.

Does BT record the originating number even when it's withheld? I imagine it
must do in order to follow up any allegations of nuisance (spam or
offensive) phone calls. Or is the number even withheld from BT?

Martin Underwood wrote:
> However presumably a list of all calls with dates/times and with numbers
> *where not withheld* would be permissible: if you don't withhold your number
> you are implicitly permitting it to be revealed to the recipient in this
> list in the same way as it is for 1471.

You're not, because this service is not available. Before 1471 was
introduced it received widespread publicity, so people who chose to
reveal their number have made that choice.

> Does BT record the originating number even when it's withheld? I imagine it
> must do in order to follow up any allegations of nuisance (spam or
> offensive) phone calls.

AFAIK BT do *not* store telephone call data indexed by called number -
it would be a massive data mining job to go through historic records. It
is much less work to flag certain called numbers, eg those receiving
malicious calls, so the call details are trapped as they pass through
the billing system.

> Or is the number even withheld from BT?

Of course not, how else would BT bill the call? The calling line
identity travels with the call along with a flag indicating withheld
status; if CLI is withheld the destination exchange is supposed to strip
the CLI information before passing the call to the customer. Anyone with
telco-level access will see the number as it goes through the system,
but end users should not.

Owain