British Airways Faces £183m Fine Over Data Breach

In September 2018, details of a massive British Airways data breach went public.

The basics of British Airways’ data breach

It was revealed that between August 21 and September 5, 2018, personal and financial details of customers using ba.com may have been compromised. Initial reports suggested that this impacted about 380,000 transactions, so that’s a significant breach.

Many of you are probably familiar with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which came into effect last year, and has some strict new guidelines for how companies have to protect consumers’ information.

British Airways facing £183m fine

British Airways is now facing the consequences of this breach under GDPR, and their fine is massive. British Airways is looking at a £183m fine from the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) for last year’s data breach.

This is the biggest penalty the ICO has ever handed out, and it’s the first to be made public under the new rules.

Information Commissioner Elizabeth Denham had the following to say:

“People’s personal data is just that – personal. When an organisation fails to protect it from loss, damage or theft, it is more than an inconvenience.

“That’s why the law is clear – when you are entrusted with personal data, you must look after it. Those that don’t will face scrutiny from my office to check they have taken appropriate steps to protect fundamental privacy rights.”

With GDPR, the maximum penalty for a breach like this is 4% of annual turnover. British Airways’ penalty amounts to about 1.5% of their annual turnover.

So while it’s not the maximum, it’s by far the biggest fine that has ever been levied, as previously the biggest penalty was a £500,000 fine to Facebook. This British Airways fine is nearly 370x as big as the previous biggest one.

It sure does seem like the commission is trying to make an example of British Airways here. While they’re fining within the limits, I think this will send a message to companies about the importance of safely securing customer data.

British Airways is appealing the decision

Following this ruling, British Airways has 28 days to appeal the decision.

IAG CEO Willie Walsh has said that the airline intends to appeal the decision:

“We intend to take all appropriate steps to defend the airline’s position vigorously, including making any necessary appeals.”

Meanwhile British Airways CEO Alex Cruz has said he’s “surprised and disappointed” in their findings:

“British Airways responded quickly to a criminal act to steal customers’ data. We have found no evidence of fraud/fraudulent activity on accounts linked to the theft.”

Bottom line

It sure seems like major data breaches have become more common in the past couple of years, rather than less common. This penalty for British Airways does seem extreme, given the previous precedent. At the same time, it doesn’t seem unreasonable in the sense that it’s not even the maximum they could be fined.

If this doesn’t send a shiver down the spine of the executive of any major company, I don’t know what will.

I’ll be curious to see if British Airways has any luck with their appeal…

Conversations (26)
The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.
Comment as a member

Membership is free and takes no more information than commenting as a guest. Earn status points for good contributions, and see fewer ads as your status grows.

Type your response here.

If you'd like to participate in the discussion, please adhere to our commenting guidelines. Anyone can comment, and your email address will not be published. Register to save your unique username and earn special OMAAT reputation perks!

  1. Loading comments…
Recent Comments
The latest from the OMAAT community.

The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.

AdamR Diamond

@derek: No. I won’t finish my appropriate allegory (no quotes needed) it with your fanciful lies. You don’t know what you’re talking about and instead choose to fabricate stories based on some weirdly intense personal dislike of someone who seemingly has no direct impact on you. Please seek help.

0
‼ 0
ChrisC Guest

@derek what absolute nonsense. where is your proof that charities have lost billions in donations because of the ICO. Yes she did fine a dozen or so of them for misusing personal data . But she also ameliorated those fines so they were much lower than they could have been. Being a charity is not a 'do anything you like' card. More damage has been done to charity fundraising because of issues of massive salaries for executives and the sex abuse scandal at Oxfam. It is quite clear from your rant that for some reason you have a dislike of Elizabeth Denham who has only been the UK regulator for three years. If the UK Government hadn't wanted a strong advocate for data protection they wouldn't have appointed her. It's about time that organisations - whether businesses,charities or the public sector - took their data protection obligations seriously. If they treat the issue seriously then they won't get fined. simple as that Oh and today she has published a notice to fine Marriott just under £100m for their data breach that went on for years. And UK law says that regulatory fines get paid to the government and not those affected - it's not her decision it's the law - yet another inaccurate statement from you. Good on her I say.

0
‼ 0
The nice Paul Diamond

@ Eskimo Parts of your comment are incomprehensible— eg: “Why would Brexit collect the fines if those who suffer are customers” What? “Brexit” is neither a person nor an organisation. How can it collect fines?! But the point is clear: just as the fines levied on someone found guilty of a crime are not handed over to the victims, so the fines on BA go to the state (where all tax-payers benefit). If you feel you’ve lost something, sue BA. That’s what civil courts are for. I manage litigation in a lot of countries and in my experience the English civil courts are relatively simple and predictable. Or you could just come on here and whine about how unfair everything is. @derekglass You’re an idiot. She’s one of the more effective UK public servants — and more power to her. If you think some charity fundraisers didn’t need reining in, google “poppy seller olive cooke”, the tragic case of a 92 year old who killed herself because she was overwhelmed by fundraising demands...

0
‼ 0
Paolo Diamond

@ Derek That’s a very harsh assessment. She has been passionate about consumer protection , both in Canada and the UK; she hasn’t shown the remotest sign of being a self-promoter. However, she has a lot of people running scared...particularly those who’ve paid scant regard to the protection of data ( and played fast and loose with the truth when breeches have occurred) and well as those engaging in deceptive advertising/marketing. More power to her...she has the sleazebags on the run. I hope she comes back for another go at Facebook.

0
‼ 0
Gary Guest

Alex Cruz's track record of cutting corners and cutting costs has now caught up with him.

0
‼ 0

Save posts to read later

Saving posts is a member feature. Become an OMAAT member to build a reading list you can come back to from any device.

Become a member
Meet Ben Schlappig, OMAAT Founder
5,883,136 Miles Traveled

43,914,800 Words Written

47,187 Posts Published

Keep Exploring OMAAT