Quote:
Originally Posted by NickD1975
I agree that people don't have to give their information, I said so above. Goldsmiths etc are using legitimate interests as their reason for processing the data, not consent. That requires a balancing test of the rights of the data subject against the rights of the company. They also need to make sure that their use of data is adequate, relevant and limited to only what is necessary.
I'm not at all sure, if pushed, they could satisfy the above, especially if, as said above, they are asking for details of people's families. At best they are pushing the limits. Notice I never said they were directly in breach though.
|
I think it depends on how you are asked for personal information, my SA knows quite a lot about me, my wife and my family but that is because I have dropped in so many times and just talked to them, I equally know a bit about their personal situations and families simply because it came out in conversations.
Now if my SA had sat me down at the first ever meeting and asked this information I doubt if I would now own a Rolex as I would not have replied to the questions but left the store.
My belief is that the stores are desperate to know about you because they are keen to try and establish if you are a flipper, I am reasonably sure that my SA doesn’t want to sell a watch to someone who then immediately sells it on, so getting to know a bit about each client is one way of trying to ascertain whether you want the watch to own and wear or whether you just want to make a fast buck.
We all bitch and moan about our AD’s and the lack of watches available but we also bitch and moan when the AD tries to establish if we are genuine buyers to own or just out to make a bit of money.
I know one thing, I certainly wouldn’t want to be an AD, they can’t do right for doing wrong.
