Is a prison warden another victim of a fictitious loan created through misuse of his personal data or does his employer know more ?
That is the question before the High Court in Mombasa where prison officer Peter Bokole is contesting deductions from his salary for a loan he insists he never borrowed.
Platinum Credit Ltd, which has been effecting the deductions, admits it has no record of Bokole taking any loan.
However, it maintains that his details, together with the loan information, were forwarded by his employer, the Kenya Prisons Service.
Bokole, a police constable at Hola Prison, first noticed a deduction on his payslip in September 2023.
Photo credit: Shutterstock
The High Court has declined to strike out the case paving the way for a full hearing to establish how the disputed loan arose.
Bokole, a police constable at Hola Prison, first noticed the problem in September 2023 when his payslip reflected a deduction of Sh2,031.This was said to be part-payment of a loan totalling Sh202,031 allegedly owed to Platinum Credit Ltd.
According to Bokole, he had neither applied for nor been granted any loan by the company.
When he enquired, Platinum Credit Limited assured him the deduction was an error and promised a refund. Despite this assurance, his October 2023 salary was again reduced by Sh2,031, purportedly as a monthly instalment for the same loan.
On December 23, 2023, Bokole filed suit against Platinum Credit Ltd, seeking several orders.
He wants the court to declare the deductions illegal and unconstitutional, compel the company to refund all monies deducted and issue a permanent injunction against any further use of his personal data.
He also claims the company unlawfully obtained and used his personal information, including his passport photo, ID details, salary records, employee number, M-Pesa statements, next of kin details, and payslip, without his consent.
Some of this, he argues, constitutes sensitive personal data.
“This amounts to a breach of my privacy and data protection rights, causing me immense loss, damage and distress,” Bokole states in his case.
He has since lodged complaints with the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner, the Directorate of Criminal Investigations and the Central Bank of Kenya. Investigations are ongoing.
In its defence, Platinum Credit admits the deductions were erroneous but blames the Kenya Prisons Service for forwarding Bokole’s details.
It further claims that once the error was discovered, it deleted Bokole’s data from its systems and refunded the deducted money.
“The plaintiff, therefore, should be put to strict proof of his claims,” the firm stated.
The company also lodged a preliminary objection, arguing that the High Court lacked jurisdiction. It cited Sections 56, 57 and 58 of the Data Protection Act, which give the Data Commissioner original jurisdiction over such complaints, with courts only handling appeals under Section 64.
Photo credit: Nation Media Group
The High Court dismissed the objection, noting that Platinum Credit had contradicted itself by admitting the court’s jurisdiction in its defence while simultaneously challenging it.
“I must say at the outset that although the defendant is questioning the jurisdiction of this court to entertain this suit, it has categorically admitted in its defence that, indeed, the court has such jurisdiction,” the judge observed.
The court held that such a departure from pleadings, without amendment or alternative plea, was improper, prejudicial, and embarrassing to the plaintiff.
It further ruled that Bokole’s claim was not solely anchored on alleged breaches of the Data Protection Act and could stand independently.
"Only where a claim is entirely dependent on the Act would the court require exhaustion of mechanisms under the Act before hearing the matter," the court said.
Consequently, the court overruled the preliminary objection, allowing the case to proceed to full hearing.
