£1,000 fine for wrong ID details , page 1

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times

Topic started on 21-11-2008 @ 12:25 PM by Extralien

£1,000 fine for wrong ID details

news.bbc.co.uk

Women who change their name after marriage could face fines of up to £1,000 if they fail to tell the government, under new proposals.

Anyone with a biometric passport or ID card will be required to notify the National Identity Register of changes to the personal data it holds.

The £30 fixed fee for an ID card is likely to rise after 2010, draft laws published earlier also reveal.

(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 21-11-2008 @ 12:25 PM by Extralien

Outrageous.

Say 'NO2ID'... get rid of this impending data base and we wont see extortion being pushed upon us.

This is surely going to be an outrage for many.

And people undergoing a sex change will be entitled to two ID cards.

Do what? ...... two id cards for one person???
Are they insane?.. can you imagine the nightmare that might ause, or maybe even unfair fines being enforced in case of any mix ups.. oh and fraud too...and maybe we'll see an increase in sex change ops too

providing false information, tampering with the register, giving out people's data without authorisation and holding false ID documents will be a criminal offence.

This is bad news for everyone.

Shadow home secretary Dominic Grieve, for the Conservatives, said the consultation document showed the ID scheme is "truly the worst of all worlds - expensive, intrusive and unworkable".

"At a time of economic hardship, the public will be dismayed that the government plans to fine innocent people for inaccuracies on the government's own database, using summary powers vested in the home secretary.

"The home secretary has confirmed the worst element of the scheme - a single, mammoth and highly vulnerable database exposing masses of our personal details to criminal hackers.

"Worse still, she has magnified the scope for fraud by allowing spot fines to be issued by email."

At least someone sees sense... unfortunately, the majority of the public will most likely follow along like the sheeple they are...

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 21-11-2008 @ 12:31 PM by Dermo

Well, in fairness to the fine.. there is no point in having an ID that gives your wrong name and details.

reply posted on 21-11-2008 @ 12:54 PM by CallSign

reply to post by Dermo

The consultation document states fines are "not intended to be punitive or revenue raising".

So what exactly are they intended to be?

There will be no penalties, civil or criminal, for not applying for an ID card.

...yet. Although once everyone has been forced to renew their passport with a biometric one, the cry will be, 'well, you've already all got biometric passports, what will an ID card hurt you?' as well as the old '...if you've got nothing to fear' chestnut.

"There is some very nasty stuff buried in the fine print of this consultation document. Basically, you have to tell them everything they want to know about you under threat - and pay for the privilege."

Does anybody know the full extent of the personal information that we could be quizzed on?

CS

reply posted on 21-11-2008 @ 12:59 PM by Extralien

reply to post by Dermo

All your personal details are quite fine as they are already.
This fine is just nother fine they are imposing on the ID card.. it is one of possibly many more too.

It will be an automatic on the spot fine if you fail to produce your id to a policeman upon demand. That's the first one. then if they decide there is a discrepancy with your details, then you face the £1000 fine too...

and it might not be your fault.

Consider the amount of ID theft and fraud already going on.
Is this in preperation for the attack of the ID data base?

Are you really sure your details are not, have not never will be reproduced by someone, or many, to be used against the system, making you, the innocent, guilty of almost any and all crimes.

You could be wrongly accused and judged due to this data base and then sent away for any amount of time.

ignorance of the law is no excuse, as they say... but it does not make it right for the law to be built onto something that will make you a criminal due to an inputting error by an operator....

reply posted on 21-11-2008 @ 01:09 PM by CallSign

Especially considering the amount of visual data on the card will be very minimal compared to the huge tracts of data that will be stored on database under your number... sorry, name.

The article gives no clues, but knowing Nu-Labour and the general state of th law in the UK, the holder will be responsible for every shred of information that is hidden and inaccessible. It is inconceivable that every single person would check their details.. the task would be enormous, it would double the workload of collating the data and inputting it overnight if every single person wanted to double check.

Absolutely staggering.

More worrying than that though is the insiduous way the ID card is being introduced, deliberately being offered voluntarily to kids. No doubt with the pretext of being nothing more sinister than something to prove your age to buy cigs and alcopops.

Once a generation of kids are on it, the scheme has got momentum, and although the old and bold might resist it, the wheels are then in motion.

reply posted on 21-11-2008 @ 01:45 PM by Rapacity

Oh, it gets better, if you're homeless you will be able to register your usual address as a hostel, park bench or park. But there is no mention of what you should put if you travel.

And, to add extra weight to the total uselessness of this ID card and central database, most ID checks will use the details on the card and will not ordinarily be checked against the central ID database.

Most biometric checks will bypass ID database

Identity checks will normally rely on the biometric data held on cards and passports rather than the National Identity Register

"Verification checks of biometrics identifiers will be made against the card in most cases using the biometrics stored in the chip, for example if the facial image or fingerprint biometrics are verified as part of an immigration check at the border," said Hillier in a parliamentary written answer on 17 November 2008.

"Only in specific circumstances, for example if an ID card has been lost, would verification of identity take place against the biometrics held on the National Identity Register. Such checks will provide a very secure and reliable means of proving identity."

Hillier was responding to questions from Labour MP Lynne Jones about the use of biometrics in the scheme. Databases of biometrics become less reliable for picking out a single individual as they grow in size, as the chance of a false match grows with every extra member.

I ask you, if the card and database are being put into place to prevent terrorism, fraud, identity theft and every other crime then how will it work if the card can be easily cloned/created without fear of the card being checked against the central database. Unless the plan is to get people to rubbish the card for the aforementioned and thereby get the public to "want" the card and database.

Personally, the database is probably about making more money out of selling access to the database to marketers and statisticians; as well as making us numbered properties of the state.

[edit on 21/11/08 by Rapacity]

reply posted on 21-11-2008 @ 01:57 PM by CallSign

reply to post by Rapacity

First I'd heard of that, and yes it does seem to be an effort to portray the ID card as a harmless piece of plastic such as a driving license or NI card and to tone down the rather sinister ramifications of RFID and biometric data.

CS

Pages: ^^TOP^^