Subject access request: no working way to ask

The rule

Access is Article 15, which gives a person confirmation of whether their data is being used, a copy of it and supplementary information. The 2025 Act added a limit: under new Article 15(1A) the person is entitled only to what the controller can provide “based on a reasonable and proportionate search”. That narrows how far a controller has to look. It does not change the duty to give people a way in.

There is a second route that is new this year. Section 164A of the Data Protection Act 2018, in force in full from 19 June 2026, lets a person complain to the controller directly. It requires the controller to “facilitate the making of complaints … by taking steps such as providing a complaint form which can be completed electronically and by other means”, to acknowledge a complaint within 30 days and to tell the person the outcome. Article 12(4) now refers to that route when a controller declines a request, and Article 15(1)(ea) lists it among the information a person is given.

The ICO does not ask for a particular channel for requests. Its guidance says there are “no formal requirements for a valid request”: a person can ask verbally or in writing, including through social media, can ask any part of the organisation, and need not use the words “subject access request”. It adds that organisations “should enable people to make SARs electronically where possible”, and says a standard form or secure online system “could” be offered, provided it is made clear that using it is not compulsory. Its preparation guidance says an organisation “could” make information available about how to make a request, for example on a website or in a privacy notice. That is guidance, not a statutory requirement for a web page.

Penalties are in the upper tier. Article 83(5)(b) puts data subjects’ rights in the group with a ceiling of GBP 17.5 million or 4% of total worldwide annual turnover, whichever is higher. The consolidated text on legislation.gov.uk now names “the Commission” as the regulator in several of these provisions, after consequential regulations under the 2025 Act took effect on 30 September 2026. The ICO pages used on this page still carry the ICO’s name.

What PeekWell checks and how

UK-09 asks the same two questions as EU-07, against the UK GDPR wording: does the site describe a way to ask for access and the other rights, and does the contact route it names open? Complaint routes are covered by UK-08.

The scan is automated. It reads your public privacy policy and the contact pages the site links to, and looks for two things: wording about the rights, and a way to use them, such as an email address, a web form or a portal. It checks that the link or form opens. A right the page never mentions, or a contact link that goes nowhere, becomes a finding.

The scan never sends a request or writes to an address. It can’t see whether the inbox is read, whether replies arrive within the time in Article 12A, or whether the right data is found. The Virgin Media and care home matters below turned on exactly those things.

The scan has the limits the report states. It sees the public pages it visited, and the members area when you give it a sign-in. It doesn’t port-scan, try to get in where it isn’t allowed, run any security test or open addresses nobody linked to. A route offered only by letter, by phone or inside an account may not show up. A Passed means the expected wording and a working route were observed on the pages scanned. It doesn’t say requests are handled correctly. The same limits apply as for the EU check.

Why it matters for a company

The ICO’s published action in this area is mostly about what happens after a request arrives. In September 2022 it reprimanded Virgin Media after over 9,500 requests in six months, 14% of them unanswered in time. It noted the company’s compliance had improved by 2022. A reprimand is not a fine, and the case shows the regulator looks at the volume, the delay and the fix.

At the other end, the ICO took a criminal case against a care home director. A woman had asked for information about her father’s care. The ICO found the director had blocked, erased or concealed records to prevent disclosure, and it prosecuted under section 173 of the Data Protection Act 2018. The ICO’s head of investigations called subject access “a fundamental right” because it helps people understand how and why organisations use their information. The offence in that case was concealing records, not lacking a web page.

For a company the common thread is the complaint. Both matters began when a person asked, did not get what they were entitled to, and complained. Since 19 June 2026 the first stop for that complaint is meant to be the company itself, through a route it has to make easy. The ICO’s complaints guidance says plainly that the process is required and that “there are no exemptions to this”.

Smaller companies and larger companies

The duty has no size threshold, though the ICO says appropriate preparation depends on the number of requests and the organisation’s size and resources.

In a small company the route is often a general contact address, a form on a website builder, or a phone number, with no one named as responsible. Requests may arrive at a sales mailbox or a social media message. Under the ICO’s guidance that can still be a valid request, because it need not go to a specific person. The risk is that nobody recognises it and the one-month clock runs. In the care home case a single director’s refusal to respond, his silence during the ICO’s investigation and an attempt to cancel the registration led to a prosecution, with a fine of GBP 1,100 and costs of GBP 5,440.

In a larger company the numbers are the issue. Thousands of requests can arrive through apps, call centres and accounts, and data sits in many systems. The Virgin Media reprimand turned on volume and timing. Larger companies also usually have a privacy team, so the questions are whether the route is easy to find from every page and whether the people who take calls and chats can recognise a request.

How to fix it

1. Say how to ask. In the privacy notice, name the rights and give one clear way to use them: an email address, a form or a portal. Make clear that other ways of asking still work.
2. Link it from every page. Put a link to the privacy notice in the footer, and link from the notice to a short “Your data rights” page with the route on it.
3. Add an electronic route. The ICO says organisations should enable electronic requests where possible. A shared mailbox with an autoreply is enough to start.
4. Add a complaints route. Since 19 June 2026 you need a way for people to complain to you about data protection, such as an electronic form, with acknowledgment within 30 days. A link next to the rights route is easy to keep up to date.
5. Name an owner and a deputy. The ICO says to appoint a specific person or central team, and to make sure more than one person knows how to deal with a request. Train anyone who answers calls, chats or social accounts to recognise a request.
6. Log the date. Record the day each request arrives, since Article 12A runs from then, and note when you ask for identity details or clarification.
7. Re-scan. Run a scan again once the wording and the working link are live. The finding should clear when the page describes the rights and the contact route opens.

Whether a given setup meets Article 12 is a question for your legal adviser, and Peeky reports only what it sees.