The Danish data pro­tec­tion aut­ho­ri­ty, Data­til­syn­et, has filed a cri­mi­nal com­plaint against Dans­ke Bank. At the same time, it reque­sted that a fine of the equi­va­lent of CHF 1.37 mil­li­on. would be impo­sed. The rea­son was that the bank had not docu­men­ted in more than 400 systems that Rules for dele­ti­on and sto­rage of per­so­nal data exi­sted or the dele­ti­on was car­ri­ed out manu­al­ly. The amount of the fine was based on the con­side­ra­ti­on that the obli­ga­ti­on to era­se is an essen­ti­al prin­ci­ple of the GDPR and that seve­ral mil­li­on indi­vi­du­als were affec­ted (Media release of the Beör­de in Danish).

The pro­ce­e­dings were pre­ce­ded by an inve­sti­ga­ti­on by the data pro­tec­tion aut­ho­ri­ty, in the cour­se of which Dans­ke Bank had dis­co­ver­ed that its pro­blems with data dele­ti­on were more exten­si­ve than ori­gi­nal­ly assu­med. It dis­c­lo­sed this fact in 2020 in respon­se to queries from the aut­ho­ri­ty its­elf (this respon­se is available here). No fine had been impo­sed at the time, but appar­ent­ly the bank had not made signi­fi­cant pro­gress with its data era­su­re pro­ject sin­ce then. In a respon­se to the cri­mi­nal com­plaint filed by the data pro­tec­tion aut­ho­ri­ty the bank com­men­ted as follows:

We have con­ti­nuous­ly focu­sed on adju­sting and imple­men­ting time limits for dele­ting data in our systems, and we have made good pro­gress with our efforts. Throug­hout the pro­cess, we have had a pro­duc­ti­ve dia­lo­gue with the DPA. Howe­ver, we have also had to reco­g­nise that the task is very com­plex and that the imple­men­ta­ti­on of time limits for dele­ting data in cer­tain systems has pro­ven time-con­sum­ing. We now take note of the DPA’s recom­men­da­ti­on and con­ti­n­ue the task of dele­ting the data that we no lon­ger have any rea­son to store while we await the out­co­me of the matter.

Les­sons lear­ned: It is per­fect­ly accep­ta­ble to dis­c­lo­se non-com­pli­ance to an aut­ho­ri­ty, but then you have to take a serious look at sol­ving the pro­blem. And data era­su­re is very deman­ding and time-con­sum­ing in a com­plex system land­scape, but this does not (any lon­ger) pre­vent aut­ho­ri­ties from impo­sing sanctions.

After all, under the revi­sed DPA, insuf­fi­ci­ent dele­ti­on is not punis­ha­ble, but it is a vio­la­ti­on of pri­va­cy and can lead to unp­lea­sant situa­tions when infor­ma­ti­on is reque­sted (and in the case of regu­la­ted insti­tu­ti­ons, it can rai­se super­vi­so­ry issues).