HI TDA

I have received another reply from Google, stating exactly the same as before.

Assuming I have not explained the situation properly, I have written again with the response/inforamtion against each of the points they have made.

Next step is ICO, as you asked about. It does not seem right that I am caught forever more on that website when the Gazette does not even publish the information any more. Hey ho.

Hi firewalker,can you tell me how long it took for response from google? I submitted my request aprox 6 weeks ago and have heard nothing ! Really very concerned re publication of address on google.
Thanks

Hi Cal

Less than 2 weeks. I receive an acknowledgement of each one (I raised two). After 1 week they wrote for more information.

It has taken from 30 June until today to respond to 2 separate claims, raised apart, and one appeal. I appealed again today.

How long has your TD been running. If it was before November 2013, then it would appear on google for 4 years and 11 months. If it is after that (per TDA) it changed and the Gazette no long publish the insolvencies. However, I have no way of testing if the google link produces a search result.

Try entering your name and town in a google search and see if there is a link shows from a company called 24globe (it will probably have Edinburgh gazette in the URL also) . That is the one I am looking at just now to see how that can be disabled. A whole different matter.

hi firewalker,2011 I started TD ( LAST PAYMENT FRIDAY !!)so looks like i will be on another year and 11 months,or longer from what you have found.I will try google again and follow what you have done and let you know how i get on..the risk of having home address on google makes me feel phisically sick.at least with the gazette it was unlikely a search would be done specifically on that ,however,google is a whole other matter...
thanks again
cal

HI Cal

Did you do a google search using your name and town?
And did you see any search entry with the globe24 or 24globe URL in it?

Hi firewalker, I didn't need to put town in,just full name ! And no I didn't see search entry with globe24 or 24 globe...
Also, recieved reply from google and it looks like a carbon copy of one sent to you.. Not quite sure what to do next....I only want my address removed !!

Hi Cal

If I use only my name, the Google search showed the Gazette link (now removed since 4 years and 11 months has lapsed).

If I use my name and town, the search showed both the Gazette and the globe24h link. The globe24h is not removed after 4 years and 11 months and still shows full name and address.

gazette.uk.globe24h.com/0/0/edinburgh/xxxxx

I am now about to write to the Information Commissioner to see what can be done to have the Globe.24h (Romanian) site information removed.

FYI

I have now spoken with the ICO office for advice on the Globe24h information apearing on google search results. The ICO appeared both interested in this and helpful. They have advised me to submit a request that they look at my case with all background information.

I have completed their website form, copies of e-mails to/from Edinburgh Gazette, to/from Google; Google search results and document produced when opened; procedure and information from Globe24h website; articles on Globe24h.

It will be interesting to hear how they view this and how they might recommend it might be handled give the European location of the website.

I guess anyone else could use the same form from the ICO website to request they review Google's refusal remove or limit the search results from Edinburgh Gazette.

I think that the ICO is the key to this.

If they ask Google to remove a webpage from their search results I bet that it happens quickly.

Poor old Google seem to be stuck between a rock and a hard place... criticised whatever they do. Being told what to do on a case by case basis would probably be better for them.

Am I sympathetic to Poor Old Google?
I think not - at this point.

The search links only appear with Google, NOT with Bing, Yahoo etc.
Google have chosen to do this.
They have chosen to refuse a request to have the Globe24h link removed.
They have chosen to refuse an Appeal which gave them full information on the background and on the Romanian Company and the concern about Identify Fraud.
The Appeal was responded to with "as per our previous answer" and the answer repeated below. No consideration was (apparently) given to the additional information.

I think they are defending their principle to do what they think is right (digging their heels in), which is at odds with the Edinburgh Gazette, the AIB, and it might transpire, the ICO with regard to removal of information after a reasonable time, or publishing information that is not excessive in relation to the matter in hand.

I do not think they are taking any moral responsibility for what is produced through their search results.

So, no, I do not have sympathy for them. And if they need case by case ruling, which could be a sensible approach, then they should arrange it that way.

I don't know if the ICO has any control over the Globe24h publications, or if it can only manage the situation through Google.
Will be interesting to see how this develops.

They haven't specifically chosen to Firewalker, the results they show are generated by a regularly changing algorithm that matches search enquiries to webpages that they have indexed.

It also seems to me that Google, under the recent EU law, probably should have chosen to remove the Globe24h link where the information has become "outdated". In my view this should be at the point that the official register they've scraped the information from - the Edinburgh Gazette - chooses to make the record "invisible" to search engines.

I also think that the AIB should review whether they should instruct/ask the Edinburgh Gazette to make all entries on there invisible to the search engines given that their new system (the Register of Insolvencies) effectively does this now.

This adds further strength to the "outdated" argument that I hope the Information Commissioner will agree with.

I'm just commenting on the fact that Google is getting battered by journalists and freedom of information campaigners on the one hand for taking things out of their search results - something that the House of Lords has now also expressed concern about.

On the other hand they're getting battered by 70,000 requests to remove certain things from certain search results - all from people who (probably legitimately in most cases) will feel aggrieved if their request is rejected by them.

I think Google should have made a different decision here in this instance, but I don't think it's fair on them that they're being made to make these decisions. They're conflicted in many ways and cannot win whatever they do. I therefore think that it should fall within the domain of a public body to make these decisions and wouldn't be surprised if this steadily becomes the case in the future.

The ICO seems like the obvious place to me.

Thanks for the explanation TDA. I know it is not about Trust Deed specifically, but would you mind clarifying the first part of your response for me. I am not so IT literate......

They haven't specifically chosen to Firewalker, the results they show are generated by a regularly changing algorithm that matches search enquiries to webpages that they have indexed.

If Yahoo, Bing etc. do not show it, why can Google not change their algorithmic function so that it is not shown? And if 'they have indexed' pages, can they choose to un-index pages? I don't understand why they are the only ones with the problem and I do see it as their choice to programme the system or index the system or randomly set algorithms to index the pages.

Or is it just me being overly simplistic?
They told me to tell the Website to remove the link that appears in the searches (as indeed the Gazette does after a period).

I agree that the ICO is the way to go now. However, if the ICO can tell Google not to index the site or show the link, then why can Google not decide that for themselves based on the submission I made? Perhaps my submission did not fit the profile for removal of the link. I did try to use all the words from the judgement.

All rhetorical really. Just how my brain functions and why I feel Google should take some responsibility for this.

Fingers cross that someone somewhere can get it removed - for everyone's sake on here.

And thank you for the points you made about out of date information - that supports the claim I made to Google and the ICO.

I'm no expert Firewalker, but as I understand it:

The search engines compete against each other to give their users the most useful search results possible when they search for anything.

This competition takes the form of using different algorithms (which change often) that set out to produce "useful" results that direct people to the information they want. There are hundreds of different factors in these algorithms.

These algorithms are incredibly general - they're very rarely going to address a single topic area with an algorithm change (there was an exception recently where Google made a change to address the strange results which were coming up when someone searched for "payday loan" - but this was also more generally about removing the number of spammy website results that come up when you do a search of any type).

Because these algorithms change it's perfectly possible in the future that Google will start to show this Gazette information much less prominently, but the other search engines might equally start to show it more prominently.

The algorithms also decide which webpages to index and which not. If the algorithm concludes in the future that Globe24h is a spammy website that doesn't produce results that are useful to online searchers it might drop out of the search results altogether.

Thank you [:)]

Update from ICO today.
After 30 days, the case has not been allocated to a caseworker yet.
It had been included in the mass of enquiries for Google.
They have no idea when a decision will be made.
Their 'experts' are working on it.
I should check back every now and again to see how it is going.

In the meantime, a google search of my name and town shows up the Trust Deed and my full name and address. And unless anything changes, it will remain in search results for ever more.

Or I can send a copy my passport, authenticated signature and follow the Rumanian company's convoluted process in order to possibly get them to remove some of the details in six months or so..... or pay something and hope they act on that and remove it sooner (assuming they will remove it) ....... at what potential risk is all of that to the theft of my identity?

Complete frustration does not begin to describe it.