Reply to post: Re: Duty of Care?

TalkTalk attack: 'No legal obligation to encrypt customer bank details', says chief

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: Duty of Care?

In the absence of another answer:

'm not legally trained but I do know what's in the Sale of Goods Act, and its Services follow on. Both have recently been incorporated into a more recent Act whose name I forgrt.

In a sale in which a consumer (ie not a business) buys services from a business (which presumably includes most of TalkTalk's customers though not necessarily most of the revenue), those services must by law be provided "with reasonable skill and care" (those are the magic words).

I'd hope that the number of recent occurrences, and the scale of the damage involved, would be sufficient to make it clear that TT have not been using "reasonable skill and care".

Now unfortunately breaking the Sale of Goods Act doesn't get the (ir)responsible senior management locked up (after due process, obviously). That needs something else.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021