George Bates, 89, and his wife Gertrude, 86, were found in a decomposed
state in October 2003, after their gas supply was cut off for non-payment of
a 140 GBP bill.The coroner reported that Mr Bates died from hypothermia, emphysema and
coronary heart disease and his wife from coronary heart disease.
British Gas told the inquiry into the couple's death that ten attempts were
made to contact the couple about the debt and there had been two visits to
their home, in June and August 2003. On the second visit the supply was
cut off, and the couple were left without gas for heating. Their bodies were
discovered by police on the 18th of October 2003 after neighbours raised the
alarm that they had not been seen for a while.
British Gas offered the company's condolences to the Bates family, but said
that its normal procedures for disconnection were followed. The company said
that it was unable to inform Social Services about the vulnerability of the
couple because the Data Protection Act prohibited them from disclosing
financial information without a customer's consent.
The Coroner said that the tragic story would be brought to the attention of
the Information Commissioner, and called for a change in the law.
British Gas agreed that the Act needed reviewing but it appears that it had
not made its concerns known to the Commissioner off its own back. Rather than
do what it could to make sure that the vulnerable would never suffer in such a
situation, it would appear that it chose to shrug its corporate shoulders and
hide behind the word of the law : That's what it says; there's nothing we
can do.
The people at British Gas may be good at following 'dodgy legislation' to the
letter, but they aren't that good at getting it changed, or even mentioning
there's a problem with it.
Indeed, if the Information Commmissioner is to believed; it would appear that
British Gas weren't particularly clear on what was allowed to be passed on or
not. The Commissioner says that the Act does not prevent information about
such risks being passed on. One does have to ask why no one at British Gas
thought about contacting the Commissioner to find out how the law actually
applied to passing information on vulnerability on ?
The most worrying aspect of the case is that British Gas do not seem to care
about putting vulnerable people at risk. They obviously realise that cutting
off supplies can create problems for the vulnerable, yet even when knowing
this, and being unable to warn any other party about the possible plight of
those affected, British Gas put profit before compassion and disconnected
the supply.
Although British Gas has not been implicated by the Coroners' verdict into the
two tragic deaths, which says they did nothing wrong, there are many who
believe that the message the inquest sent out was, "Capitalism kills".
There are no corporate manslaughter charges to be filed against British Gas, but
that does not absolve them from all responsibility; why did they not take it
upon themselves to bring a deficiency in the decades old Data Protection Act
to the authorities, and why do they not appear to have any policy in place for
dealing with vulnerable people; and if they do; why doesn't it work ?
How many more truly vulnerable people have British Gas cut off who, but by the
grace of God, are not knocking on the Gates of Heaven ?
Do British Gas even care ?
Awarded for their Actions and Inactions
For their part in this sad incident, the Human Rights watchdog, Privacy
International announced Britsh Gas as the winner of the 2004
Big Brother awards in
the Most Invasive Company categoryAnnouncing the award, Privacy International declared British Gas to be the
deserving recipent;
"For its unfounded and cowardly claim that the Data Protection Act was the
reason why an elderly couple died after British Gas had disconnected their gas
supply. The hypothermia and absence of any duty of care apparently were
secondary factors".
