Essex County Council employee used work computer to look up confidential details

Basildon Recorder: Essex County Council employee used work computer to look up confidential details Essex County Council employee used work computer to look up confidential details

AN employee from Essex County Council used a council database to find out confidential information about a friend’s former partner and her children.

Grant King, 33, of Brunel Close, Basildon, was fined £3,809 at Basildon Magistrates’ Court for accessing a social services database 624 times.

He admitted 13 counts of obtaining personal information from a database while working as a business support officer at Essex County Council between 2010 and 2013.

In mitigation, King told the court he hacked into the system – which contains sensitive information about children and young people in care – because he was fed up in his job.

He said: “I was bored at work. It was sly and ridiculous, I know it was stupid.”

King was employed as a business support manager at Essex County Council and had a generic employee username and password which allowed him access to Protocol, the social services database.

The court heard the nature of his job meant he had no reason to log on to the system.

During his time at County Hall, King’s friend, who cannot be named for legal reasons, became involved in family court proceedings over the custody of his children.

King admitted logging into Protocol and looking up the details about the children.

But he denied ever passing the information on to his pal – something Basildon Magistrates’ Court accepted.

The court heard King was caught after one of his victims heard, from another member of the family, her personal details had been hacked.

The woman contacted the authorities and King, who had a pregnant wife at the time, was suspended by Essex County Council while it launched an investigation.

King was then arrested in September and admitted logging on to the system.

He has since been sacked from his job and is now in a junior position at another company.

King was given credit for his early guilty plea and was fined £293 for each breach.

He was also ordered to pay a £29 victim surcharge and £85 court costs.

Comments (10)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:55pm Fri 2 May 14

BillericayAdam says...

Your maths is wrong..

"and was fined £293 for each breach."

and

"fined £3,809 at Basildon Magistrates’ Court for accessing a social services database 624 times"

This would mean a fine of £182k!!
Your maths is wrong.. "and was fined £293 for each breach." and "fined £3,809 at Basildon Magistrates’ Court for accessing a social services database 624 times" This would mean a fine of £182k!! BillericayAdam
  • Score: 2

3:24pm Fri 2 May 14

jolllyboy says...

So much for we will keep your details private with limited access.
So much for we will keep your details private with limited access. jolllyboy
  • Score: 6

3:29pm Fri 2 May 14

the25man says...

A lot of Councils have data bases with a common password that employees use as the data base is for general use but for only those authorised. The data base in this case was not hacked as Mr King was not authorised to use it, but was authorised to use the computer connected to the Councils system.
A lot of Councils have data bases with a common password that employees use as the data base is for general use but for only those authorised. The data base in this case was not hacked as Mr King was not authorised to use it, but was authorised to use the computer connected to the Councils system. the25man
  • Score: 1

3:30pm Fri 2 May 14

inrayleigh says...

The math is correct - he admitted 13 counts, was fined £293 for each of those 13 admissions, so 13 x £293 is £3809.
The math is correct - he admitted 13 counts, was fined £293 for each of those 13 admissions, so 13 x £293 is £3809. inrayleigh
  • Score: 2

3:50pm Fri 2 May 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

Data protection breach always pursued against the smaller fish, shame it's not applied to those in the deeper ponds, but then that would never happen, because it's those bigger fish that get away...
Data protection breach always pursued against the smaller fish, shame it's not applied to those in the deeper ponds, but then that would never happen, because it's those bigger fish that get away... carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: 2

5:49pm Fri 2 May 14

profondo asbo says...

carnmountyouknowitma
kessense
wrote:
Data protection breach always pursued against the smaller fish, shame it's not applied to those in the deeper ponds, but then that would never happen, because it's those bigger fish that get away...
what like the nsa?
[quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: Data protection breach always pursued against the smaller fish, shame it's not applied to those in the deeper ponds, but then that would never happen, because it's those bigger fish that get away...[/p][/quote]what like the nsa? profondo asbo
  • Score: 0

7:11pm Fri 2 May 14

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...

profondo asbo wrote:
carnmountyouknowitma

kessense
wrote:
Data protection breach always pursued against the smaller fish, shame it's not applied to those in the deeper ponds, but then that would never happen, because it's those bigger fish that get away...
what like the nsa?
Try writing your own post for once, instead of acting like a turd on a shoe
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: Data protection breach always pursued against the smaller fish, shame it's not applied to those in the deeper ponds, but then that would never happen, because it's those bigger fish that get away...[/p][/quote]what like the nsa?[/p][/quote]Try writing your own post for once, instead of acting like a turd on a shoe carnmountyouknowitmakessense
  • Score: -4

9:13pm Fri 2 May 14

profondo asbo says...

carnmountyouknowitma
kessense
wrote:
profondo asbo wrote:
carnmountyouknowitma


kessense
wrote:
Data protection breach always pursued against the smaller fish, shame it's not applied to those in the deeper ponds, but then that would never happen, because it's those bigger fish that get away...
what like the nsa?
Try writing your own post for once, instead of acting like a turd on a shoe
i have to correct your nonsense. it's a full time job. projectile verbal diarrhea and i'm sugar coating.
[quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carnmountyouknowitma kessense[/bold] wrote: Data protection breach always pursued against the smaller fish, shame it's not applied to those in the deeper ponds, but then that would never happen, because it's those bigger fish that get away...[/p][/quote]what like the nsa?[/p][/quote]Try writing your own post for once, instead of acting like a turd on a shoe[/p][/quote]i have to correct your nonsense. it's a full time job. projectile verbal diarrhea and i'm sugar coating. profondo asbo
  • Score: -2

9:16pm Fri 2 May 14

profondo asbo says...

but i note your irritation and that spurs me on.
but i note your irritation and that spurs me on. profondo asbo
  • Score: -1

12:07pm Sat 3 May 14

Kim Gandy says...

Can't you people stay on topic. You're turning this website into a bear garden.
Can't you people stay on topic. You're turning this website into a bear garden. Kim Gandy
  • Score: -1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree