Violation of Privacy Policy.

[pbminor]

What exactly do you WANT to happen?

As you have been informed, even in the unlikely event that the BOE can prove that the leak came from their organization, what do you expect to happen? Are there statutory damages for such a thing?

No one is going to jail. No one is going to pay you a ton of money. Aside from receiving an apology, what do you expect?

I want it fixed. It did cause me somewhat of a problem. I'm sure it has caused issues for others. If it shouldn't be happening, and there are laws against it happening, then I want it stopped. Simple as that.
(I'm kind of a freak about social justice and things of the sort if that helps explain my persistence?)

I'm still trying to figure out what the OP thinks that the information on a seller's permit is confidential...

Actually, I didn't until I was at the BOE getting some papers, when I mentioned the junk mail to the clerk. She insisted it did not originate from them. I was almost certain it had. Then she told me that there are laws that prohibit it (releasing an individual/sole proprietor's address.) That's what started my pursuit in finding out what really happened. I had to close out my first seller's permit anyway (because of the breech) so when I got the next permit, I made sure to use a name that would provide proof. A name that had never been used by us before, for any reason, and would never be used for any other purpose. That's why I am so 100% sure that this is what occurred.

 

[Zigner]

I keep hearing you say that, and I agree that the BOE didn't "release" (as in, give out) the info, but it IS public knowledge. As you were told previously, certain entities monitor new seller permit applications in order to send you offers.

I know you don't want to hear it, so I'm sure you won't accept this.

 

[pbminor]

I keep hearing you say that, and I agree that the BOE didn't "release" (as in, give out) the info, but it IS public knowledge. As you were told previously, certain entities monitor new seller permit applications in order to send you offers.

I know you don't want to hear it, so I'm sure you won't accept this.

It's not that I don't want to hear it. It's that the BOE DID release my information. It's that every representative of the BOE, including those who have consulted with their supervisors, along with representatives from the Taxpayer's Rights Advocacy group and their supervisor, are insisting that this IS NOT happening. And that if it were, it should definitely be fixed because there are laws against it.
Believe me, at this point it would be a lot easier on me if they were to tell me they made a mistake in interpreting the law. And that yes, they do release personal info on individuals/sole proprietors. I could simply look up the law to verify and leave it at that.
Here's a quick explanation. On the application ( http://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/boe400spa.pdf ) it asks "Type of ownership". One of the options is "Sole Owner". If you mark Sole Owner, then the info you enter is your individual info (name & address). According to Cal. civil code 1798.69, individual info cannot be released. Therefore, the only way someone can get this info is from the owner of the seller's permit, through things like bank accts., business ads, business licenses, etc. Which NONE of that has occurred. The "Business name" we entered on the application was never in existance until we wrote it on the application, and it still is nothing except a name we wrote on the application to see if it would generate junk mail. There was no public involved anywhere to acknowledge it, ever.

 

[Zigner]

It's not that I don't want to hear it. It's that the BOE DID release my information. It's that every representative of the BOE, including those who have consulted with their supervisors, along with representatives from the Taxpayer's Rights Advocacy group and their supervisor, are insisting that this IS NOT happening. And that if it were, it should definitely be fixed because there are laws against it.
Believe me, at this point it would be a lot easier on me if they were to tell me they made a mistake in interpreting the law. And that yes, they do release personal info on individuals/sole proprietors. I could simply look up the law to verify and leave it at that.
Here's a quick explanation. On the application ( http://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/boe400spa.pdf ) it asks "Type of ownership". One of the options is "Sole Owner". If you mark Sole Owner, then the info you enter is your individual info (name & address). According to Cal. civil code 1798.69, individual info cannot be released. Therefore, the only way someone can get this info is from the owner of the seller's permit, through things like bank accts., business ads, business licenses, etc. Which NONE of that has occurred. The "Business name" we entered on the application was never in existance until we wrote it on the application, and it still is nothing except a name we wrote on the application to see if it would generate junk mail. There was no public involved anywhere to acknowledge it, ever.

Your business name would NEVER be confidential.
And, from the very link you posted (the PDF of the application):

Is information about my account subject to
public disclosure?
State laws that protect your privacy generally cover
your records. Some records are subject to public disclosure,
such as the information on your seller’s permit,
names of owners or partners, your business address,
and your permit status. See the disclosure information
on the back page.


Again, I believe your assertion that your business name is confidential is incorrect.

 

[pbminor]

Your business name would NEVER be confidential.
And, from the very link you posted (the PDF of the application):

Is information about my account subject to
public disclosure?
State laws that protect your privacy generally cover
your records. Some records are subject to public disclosure,
such as the information on your seller’s permit,
names of owners or partners, your business address,
and your permit status. See the disclosure information
on the back page.


Again, I believe your assertion that your business name is confidential is incorrect.

Thanks. I'm reading the same things you are. In most circumstances, I would agree with you, a business name is public knowledge. It would be public knowledge through the BOE and many other sources. However, in my case, the BOE is the ONLY one with our business information.
I also know under most circumstances the BOE can and does release info. I find it very confusing that the BOE and the rights advocacy group are telling me that Cal. Civ Code 1768.69, where it states "the State Board of Equalization may not release the names and addresses of individuals", applies in my situation. And that if my permit states sole owner, then they should not be releasing my name and address. They insist the marketing company must have obtained the info elsewhere. I know that would have been impossible as this info has never been used elsewhere.
Here is a link to the Cal. codes http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=11870027720+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

 

[Zigner]

Thanks. I'm reading the same things you are. In most circumstances, I would agree with you, a business name is public knowledge. It would be public knowledge through the BOE and many other sources. However, in my case, the BOE is the ONLY one with our business information.
I also know under most circumstances the BOE can and does release info. I find it very confusing that the BOE and the rights advocacy group are telling me that Cal. Civ Code 1768.69, where it states "the State Board of Equalization may not release the names and addresses of individuals", applies in my situation. And that if my permit states sole owner, then they should not be releasing my name and address. They insist the marketing company must have obtained the info elsewhere. I know that would have been impossible as this info has never been used elsewhere.
Here is a link to the Cal. codes http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=11870027720+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

Good luck in your efforts.

 

[HighwayMan]

I think this horse has been beaten to death.