A survey conducted in April and May 2023 revealed that around ** percent of the companies that do business in the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom (UK) found it challenging to adapt to new or changing requirements of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA). A further ** percent of the survey respondents said it was challenging to increase the budget because of the changes in the data privacy laws.

As of February 2025, the largest fine issued for violation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the United Kingdom (UK) was more than 22 million euros, received by British Airways in October 2020. Another fine received by Marriott International Inc. in the same month was the second-highest in the UK and amounted to over 20 million euros.

A Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) is one of the ways to find out what privacy risks people face when information is collected, used, stored, or shared about them. This helps the London Borough of Barnet find issues so that risks can be taken away or lowered to a level that is acceptable. It also cuts down on privacy breaches and complaints that could hurt the Council's reputation or lead to action by the Information Commissioner (the government watchdog). The London Borough of Barnet makes DPIAs public in with its Data Charter and the 2018 Data Protection Act and UK GDPR.

A survey conducted in April and May 2023 among companies that do business in the European Union and the United Kingdom (UK) found that over half of the respondents, ** percent, felt very prepared for the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). A further ** percent of the companies believed they were moderately prepared, while ** percent said they were slightly ready to comply with the EU and UK privacy legislations.

A Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) pre-screen is a shortened version of the full DPIA and is used to determine if the full assessment is needed. It should be carried out before any new data processing starts (or if the processing is already happening, before a change that will involve a high risk to individuals starts). In many cases the pre-screen is sufficient to assess and manage any risks and a full assessment is not required. Like full DPIAs, these are published in accordance with the Council's Data Charter and also the GDPR/Data Protection Act 2018.”

Thank you for your request for information about the following: Request You asked us: ‘I require the following under my rights in the UK GDPR, the Data Protection Act 2018, and the Freedom of Information Act 2000: • The full name and professional registration number of the independent medical assessor who reviewed or is currently reviewing my claim • The name and registered address of the organisation/company employing them • Details of who owns and/or controls that organisation, including parent companies • Details of who funded the assessor’s work on my case and the terms of payment (hourly, per case, etc.) The NHS Business Services Authority (NHSBSA) received your request on 11 August 2025. We have handled your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). Our response I can confirm that the NHSBSA holds some of the information you have requested and a copy of the information. Question 1 - The full name and professional registration number of the independent medical assessor who reviewed or is currently reviewing my claim Name(s) The following response does not relate to a specific claim or claimant. The request is being answered more generally given requests under FOIA are requester-blind, that is to say the identity of the requester is not taken into account when considering a request for information under FOIA. I can confirm that we do hold the names of the medical assessors however, we consider the names of the medical assessor to be personal data under the Data Protection Act 2018. Please be aware that I have decided not to release the names of the medical assessors as this information falls under the exemption in section 40 subsections 2 and 3(A)(a) of the FOIA. This is because disclosure of their names would result in their identification. As the requested information would allow a medical assessor to be identified, I consider this information is exempt. This is because it would breach the first data protection principle as: a) it is not fair to disclose their personal details to the world and is likely to cause damage or distress. b) these details are not of sufficient interest to the public to warrant an intrusion into their privacy. The requested information is exempt if disclosure would contravene any of the data protection principles. For disclosure to comply with the lawfulness, fairness, and transparency principle, we either need the consent of the data subject(s) or there must be a legitimate interest in disclosure. In addition, the disclosure must be necessary to meet the legitimate interest and finally, the disclosure must not cause unwarranted harm. This means that the NHSBSA is therefore required to conduct a balancing exercise between the legitimate interest of the applicant in disclosure against the rights and freedoms of the medical assessor. While I acknowledge that you have a legitimate interest in disclosure of the information, the disclosure of the requested information would cause unwarranted harm. Disclosure under FOIA is to the world and therefore the NHSBSA has to consider the overall impact of the disclosure and its duty of care. The expectation of the medical assessors is that they will remain anonymous and will therefore not be subject to contact or pressure from claimants or campaigning groups. Given the certainty that the name and will identify them, there is a reasonable expectation that this information will not be disclosed under the FOIA. Disclosing this information would be unfair and as such this would breach the UK General Data Protection Regulation first data protection principle. Please see the following link to view the section 40 exemption in full: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/section/40 Question 2 - The name and registered address of the organisation/company employing them The prime contractor delivering the service is: Crawford & Company Adjusters (UK) Limited The Hallmark Building 106 Fenchurch Street London EC3M 5JE Question 3 - Details of who owns and/or controls that organisation, including parent companies The parent company is Crawford & Company Adjusters (UK) Limited. Question 4 - Details of who funded the assessor’s work on my case and the terms of payment (hourly, per case, etc.) The NHSBSA administers the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme (VDPS) on behalf of DHSC and contracts a third-party supplier for the provision of medical assessments under the scheme. The third-party supplier is paid by the NHSBSA

Since the enforcement of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in May 2018, fines have been issued for several types of violations. As of February 2025, the most significant share of penalties was due to companies' non-compliance with general data processing principles. This violation has led to over 2.4 billion euros worth of fines.

A data protection impact assessment (DPIA) is a process to identify privacy risks to individuals in the collection, use, storing, and disclosure of information. This allows Camden to identify problems so that risks can be removed or reduced to acceptable levels. It also reduces privacy breaches and complaints which can damage the Council’s reputation or enforcement action against it by the Information Commissioner (the regulator). We publish these as a dataset in accordance with the Council's Data Charter and also the GDPR/Data Protection Act 2018.

Question 2 National Audit Office (NAO) are the auditors of the NHS Pension Scheme Accounts. The main contact at NAO has not consented to the disclosure and is therefore exempt under 40 subsections 2 and 3A (a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, as disclosure of this information would be unfair and as such this would breach the UK GDPR first data protection principle because: a) it is not fair to disclose main contact of the NAO personal details to the world and is likely to cause damage or distress. b) these details are not of sufficient interest to the public to warrant an intrusion into the privacy of the main contact of the NAO. NAO have provided the name of the Auditor General, Gareth Davies Government Internal Audit Agency (GIAA) currently provide Internal Audit for the NHSBSA. This includes the following areas of NHS pensions for 2023/24: Member Data McCloud and other Legislative Changes . Pensions Annual Allowance Charge Compensation Scheme (PAACCS) My NHS Pensions Portal Government Internal Audit Agency (GIAA) - The main contact at GIAA has not consented to the disclosure and is therefore exempt under 40 subsections 2 and 3A (a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, as disclosure of this information would be unfair and as such this would breach the UK GDPR first data protection principle because: a) it is not fair to disclose main contact of the Government Internal Audit Agency’s personal details to the world and is likely to cause damage or distress. b) these details are not of sufficient interest to the public to warrant an intrusion into the privacy of the main contact of the Government Internal Audit Agency. Please click the below web link to see the exemption in full. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/section/40 Question 3 National Audit Office (NAO) National Audit Office 157-197 Buckingham Palace Road London SW1W 9SP Government Internal Audit Agency (GIAA) Governance Team Corporate Services Directorate Government Internal Audit Agency 10 Victoria Street Westminster London SW1H 0NB United Kingdom Question 4

In September 2024, the Irish Data Protection Commission fined Meta Ireland 91 million euros after passwords of social media users were stored in 'plaintext' on Meta's internal systems rather than with cryptographic protection or encryption. In May 2023, the EU fined Meta 1.2 billion euros for violating laws on digital privacy and putting the data of EU citizens at risk through Facebook's EU-U.S. data transfers. European privacy legislation is seen as being far stricter than American privacy law, and the sending of EU citizens’ data to the United States resulted in the record breaking penalty being issued to the tech giant. In January 2023, after it was discovered that Meta Platforms had improperly required that users of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp accept personalized adverts to use the platforms, the company was issued a 390 million euro fine by the European Commission. EU regulators claim that the social media giant broke the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) by including the demand in its terms of service. In addition, Meta was fined 405 million euros by the Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) in September 2022 for violating Instagram's children's privacy settings. In November 2022, the DPC fined Meta a further 265 million euros for failing to protect their users from data scraping. GDPR violations in 2022 Social media sites and companies are not the only types of online services upon which users' data can potentially be compromised. In 2022, the online service with the biggest fine for violating GDPR was e-commerce and digital powerhouse Amazon, which was issued a 746 million euro fine. Furthermore, in December 2021, Google was penalized 90 million euros for GDPR violations. What are the most common GDPR violations? Since GDPR went into effect in May 2018, fines have been imposed for a variety of reasons. As of June 2022, companies' non-compliance with general data processing principles accounted for the largest share of fines, resulting in over 845 million euros worth of penalties. Insufficient legal basis for data processing was the second most common violation, amounting to 447 million euros in fines.

I can confirm that the NHS Business Services Authority (NHSBSA) holds the information you have requested. However, we consider the full names of NHSBSA employees to be personal data under section 3(2) of the Data Protection Act 2018. Disclosure of an employee’s name may result in their identification. Please be aware that I have decided not to release the full name of the person(s) corresponding with you. This is because the personal details of NHSBSA employees as this information falls under the exemption in section 40 subsections 2 and 3(A)(a) of the FOIA. As the requested information would allow a NHSBSA employee to be identified, I consider this information is exempt. This is because it would breach the first data protection principle as: a. it is not fair to disclose NHSBSA employees’ personal details to the world and is likely to cause damage or distress to the NHSBSA employee b. these details are not of sufficient interest to the public to warrant an intrusion into the privacy of the NHSBSA employee The requested information is exempt if disclosure would contravene any of the data protection principles. For disclosure to comply with the lawfulness, fairness, and transparency principle, we either need the consent of the data subject(s) or there must be a legitimate interest in disclosure. In addition, the disclosure must be necessary to meet the legitimate interest and finally, the disclosure must not cause unwarranted harm. This means that the NHSBSA is therefore required to conduct a balancing exercise between the legitimate interest of the applicant in disclosure against the rights and freedoms of the NHSBSA employee. While I acknowledge that you have a legitimate interest in disclosure of the information, the disclosure of the requested information would cause unwarranted harm. Disclosure under FOIA is to the world and therefore the NHSBSA has to consider the overall impact of the disclosure and its duty of care. The expectation of the NHSBSA employees is that they will remain anonymous and will therefore not be subject to contact or pressure from claimants or campaigning groups. Given the likelihood that the personal details would identify the NHSBSA employee there is a reasonable expectation that this information will not be disclosed under the FOIA. Disclosing this information would be unfair and as such would breach the UK General Data Protection Regulation first data protection principle.

Dataset on commits (and repositories) on GitHub making reference to data privacy legislation (covering laws: GDPR, CCPA, CPRA, UK DPA).

The dataset contains:
+ all_commits_info_merged-v2-SHA.csv : commits information as collected from various GitHub REST API calls (all data merged together).
+ repos_info_merged_USED-v2_with_loc.csv: repository information with some calculated data.
+ top-70-repos-commits-for-manual-check_commits-2coders.xlsx: results of the manual coding of the commits of the 70 most popular repositories in dataset.
+ user-rights-ω3.csv: different terms for user rights teriminology in legislation.
+ github_commits_analysis_replication.r: main analysis pipeline covering all RQs in the R programming language.

In order to perform also the initial data collection, the GitHub REST API can be used, collecting data using time intervals, for instance:
https://api.github.com/search/commits?q=%22GDPR%22+committer-date:2018-05-25..2018-05-30&sort=committer-date&order=asc&per_page=100&page=1

This dataset accompanies the following publication, so please cite it accordingly:

Georgia M. Kapitsaki, Maria Papoutsoglou, Evolution of repositories and privacy laws: commit activities in the GDPR and CCPA era, accepted for publication at Elsevier Journal of Systems & Software, 2025.

List of properties licensed under the Council’s HMO Licensing Scheme. This list is updated on a monthly basis. Under section 232 of The Housing Act 2004 the London Borough of Barnet is required to maintain and make available a public register of licensed Houses in Multiple Occupations. An extract of the register is published on the Council’s website here. The dataset is not intended for marketing purposes and none of the individuals or organisations mentioned within this register have given their consent for such use. Companies wishing to use this data for commercial purposes, and marketing in particular, are advised to consider whether their use of this data complies with the UK General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR), Data Protection Act 2018, and the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations 2003. Information Rights are upheld by the Information Commissioners Office, for further information, see the Information Commissioner’s Office website at ww.ico.org.uk. More information on Houses in Multiple Occupancy can be found on our website as well as on the council's Planning portal. You will need to select "Houses in Multiple Occupation" from the drop-down menu and click "Search":

The name of the medical assessor for VDPS claim. Response I can confirm that we do hold this information relating to medical assessors; however, we are issuing a refusal notice under section 17 of the FOIA as we consider the name and General Medical Council (GMC) number to be personal data as defined under section 3(2) of the Data Protection Act 2018. Disclosure of the medical assessor’s name or GMC number would result in the identification of the medical assessor when entered into the GMC public register. Please be aware that I have decided not to release the names and GMC numbers of the medical assessors as this information falls under the exemption in section 40 subsections 2 and 3(A)(a) of the FOIA. As the requested information would allow a medical assessor to be identified, I consider this information is exempt. This is because it would breach the first data protection principle as: a. it is not fair to disclose medical assessors’ personal details to the world and is likely to cause damage or distress. b. these details are not of sufficient interest to the public to warrant an intrusion into the privacy of the medical assessor. The requested information is exempt if disclosure would contravene any of the data protection principles. For disclosure to comply with the lawfulness, fairness, and transparency principle, we either need the consent of the data subject(s) or there must be a legitimate interest in disclosure. In addition, the disclosure must be necessary to meet the legitimate interest and finally, the disclosure must not cause unwarranted harm. This means that the NHSBSA is therefore required to conduct a balancing exercise between the legitimate interest of the applicant in disclosure against the rights and freedoms of the medical assessor. While I acknowledge that you have a legitimate interest in disclosure of the information, the disclosure of the requested information would cause unwarranted harm. Disclosure under FOIA is to the world and therefore the NHSBSA must consider the overall impact of the disclosure and its duty of care. The expectation of the medical assessors is that they will remain anonymous and will therefore not be subject to contact or pressure from claimants or campaigning groups. Given the certainty that the name and/or GMC number will identify the medical assessor there is a reasonable expectation that this information will not be disclosed under the FOIA. Disclosing this information would be unfair and as such this would breach the UK General Data Protection Regulation first data protection principle.

‘I be provided with the names, qualifications, and declarations of interest for any medical assessors who have provided opinions on my case to date.’ Our response Qualifications or Declarations of Interest The NHSBSA does not hold information on the medical assessors' qualifications or declarations of interest. This is because their medical qualifications and experience are the responsibility of the third-party medical assessment supplier. I hope, however, that the following information provides reassurance on this point: Each case is considered on its own merits by an experienced medical assessor. The contract with our supplier does not require them to tell us details of the medical assessors’ qualifications or experience. The contract requires that all assessments carried out are undertaken by suitably qualified and experienced Registered Medical Practitioners. This includes being registered on the UK General Medical Council register, with a licence to practise and meet or exceed the following requirements: they are a Registered Medical Practitioner with at least five years’ post graduate experience; and they have experience of the performance of medical and/ or disability assessment, addressing questions of causation and impact in the context of legislative or policy requirements to assist the decision maker Name(s) Regarding the name of the assessor(s), I can confirm that this information is held by the NHSBSA as it is included in the medical report received from the medical assessment supplier. All medical assessors are UK based. The name and location of the medical assessor is redacted before this report is disclosed to the claimant or their representative. Given this will allow the medical assessor to be identified, this information would not be disclosed under the exemption in section 40 subsections 2 and 3A (a) of the Freedom of Information Act. The expectation of the medical assessors is that they will remain anonymous and will therefore not be subject to contact or pressure from claimants or campaigning groups. Given the likelihood their name and location will identify the medical assessor, there is a reasonable expectation that this information will not be disclosed under FOI. Disclosing this information would be unfair and as such, this would breach the UK GDPR first data protection principle. Disclosure of the name and location is likely to result in considerable distress to the medical assessor. Therefore, this information falls under the exemption in section 40 subsections 2 and 3A (a) of the Freedom of Information Act. This is because it would breach the first data protection principle as: a. it is not fair to disclose medical assessors’ personal details to the world and is likely to cause damage or distress b. these details are not of sufficient interest to the public to warrant an intrusion into the privacy of the medical assessor The requested information is exempt if disclosure contravenes any of the data protection principles. For disclosure to comply with the lawfulness, fairness, and transparency principle, we either need the consent of the data subject(s) or there must be a legitimate interest in disclosure. In addition, the disclosure must be necessary to meet the legitimate interest and finally, the disclosure must not cause unwarranted harm. This means that the NHSBSA is therefore required to conduct a balancing exercise between the legitimate interest of the applicant in disclosure against the rights and freedoms of the medical assessor. While I acknowledge that you have a legitimate interest in disclosure of the information, the disclosure of the requested information would cause unwarranted harm. Disclosure under FOIA is to the world and therefore the NHSBSA has to consider the overall impact of the disclosure and its duty of care. The expectation of the medical assessors is that they will remain anonymous and will therefore not be subject to contact or pressure from claimants or campaigning groups. Given the certainty that the name will identify them, there is a reasonable expectation that this information will not be disclosed under the FOIA. Disclosing this information would be unfair and as such would breach the UK General Data Protection Regulation first data protection principle. Please see the following link to view the section 40 exemption in full: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/section/40 In addition, the medical assessor has not consented to this disclosure.

iCell human microglia were treated in triplicate (replicates a, b and c) with vehicle or 5 ng/mL human IFN-β for 6 or 24 h followed by RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq). The sample preparation, RNA-seq and transcriptomics data analysis were performed by AstraZeneca. The raw FASTQ data files cannot be made publicly available in accordance with the UK General Data Protection Regulation and the Data Protection Act 2018.

Snapshot img

Insurance Analytics Market Size 2025-2029

The insurance analytics market size is valued to increase by USD 16.12 billion, at a CAGR of 16.7% from 2024 to 2029. Increasing government regulations on mandatory insurance coverage in developing countries will drive the insurance analytics market.

Market Insights

North America dominated the market and accounted for a 36% growth during the 2025-2029.
By Deployment - Cloud segment was valued at USD 4.41 billion in 2023
By Component - Tools segment accounted for the largest market revenue share in 2023

Market Size & Forecast

Market Opportunities: USD 328.64 million 
Market Future Opportunities 2024: USD 16123.20 million
CAGR from 2024 to 2029 : 16.7%

Market Summary

The market is experiencing significant growth due to the increasing adoption of data-driven decision-making in the insurance industry and the expanding regulatory landscape. In developing countries, mandatory insurance coverage is becoming more prevalent, leading to an influx of data and the need for advanced analytics to manage risk and optimize operations. Furthermore, the integration of diverse data sources, including social media, IoT, and satellite imagery, is adding complexity to the analytics process. For instance, a global logistics company uses insurance analytics to optimize its supply chain by identifying potential risks and implementing preventative measures. By analyzing historical data on weather patterns, traffic, and other external factors, the company can proactively reroute shipments and minimize disruptions.
Additionally, compliance with regulations such as the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) requires insurers to invest in advanced analytics solutions to ensure data security and privacy. Despite these opportunities, challenges remain. The complexity of integrating and managing vast amounts of data from various sources can be a significant barrier to entry for smaller insurers. Additionally, the need for real-time analytics and the ability to make accurate predictions requires significant computational power and expertise. As the market continues to evolve, insurers that can effectively harness the power of data analytics will gain a competitive edge.

What will be the size of the Insurance Analytics Market during the forecast period?

Get Key Insights on Market Forecast (PDF) Request Free Sample

The market is a dynamic and ever-evolving landscape, driven by advancements in technology and the growing demand for data-driven insights. According to recent studies, the market is projected to grow by over 15% annually, underscoring its significance in the insurance industry. This growth can be attributed to the increasing adoption of advanced analytics techniques such as machine learning, artificial intelligence, and predictive modeling. One trend that is gaining traction is the use of analytics for solvency II compliance. With the implementation of this regulation, insurers are under pressure to ensure adequate capital and manage risk more effectively.
Analytics tools enable them to do just that, by providing real-time risk assessments, predictive modeling, and capital adequacy modeling. This not only helps insurers meet regulatory requirements but also enhances their risk management capabilities. Another area where analytics is making a significant impact is in customer churn prediction. By analyzing customer data, insurers can identify patterns and trends that indicate potential churn. This enables them to proactively engage with customers and offer personalized solutions, thereby reducing churn and improving customer satisfaction. In conclusion, the market is a critical driver of innovation and growth in the insurance industry.
Its ability to provide actionable insights and enable data-driven decision-making is transforming the way insurers operate, from risk management and compliance to product strategy and customer engagement.

Unpacking the Insurance Analytics Market Landscape

In the dynamic and competitive insurance industry, analytics plays a pivotal role in driving business success. Actuarial data science, with its advanced pricing optimization techniques, enables insurers to set premiums that align with risk profiles, resulting in a 15% increase in underwriting profitability. Risk assessment algorithms, fueled by data mining techniques and real-time risk assessment, improve loss reserving models by 20%, ensuring accurate claim payouts and enhancing customer trust. Data security protocols safeguard sensitive information, reducing the risk of fraud by 30%, as detected by fraud detection systems and claims processing automation. Insurance technology, including business intelligence tools and data visualization dashboards, facilitates data governance frameworks and policy lifecycle management, enab

I can confirm that we do hold information on the names and General Medical Council (GMC) numbers for independent medical assessors. Please note that this response does not relate to a specific claim or claimant. The request is being answered more generally given requests under FOIA are requester-blind, that is to say the identity of the requester is not taken into account when considering a request for information under FOIA. We consider the name and GMC number to be personal data under the Data Protection Act 2018. Disclosure of their names or GMC numbers would result in their identification when entered into the GMC public register. Please be aware that I have decided not to release the names and GMC numbers of the independent medical assessors as this information falls under the exemption in section 40 subsections 2 and 3(A)(a) of the FOIA. As the requested information would allow an independent medical assessor to be identified, I consider this information is exempt. This is because it would breach the first data protection principle as: A. it is not fair to disclose their personal details to the world and is likely to cause damage or distress. B. these details are not of sufficient interest to the public to warrant an intrusion into their privacy. The requested information is exempt if disclosure would contravene any of the data protection principles. For disclosure to comply with the lawfulness, fairness, and transparency principle, we either need the consent of the data subject(s) or there must be a legitimate interest in disclosure. In addition, the disclosure must be necessary to meet the legitimate interest and finally, the disclosure must not cause unwarranted harm. This means that the NHSBSA is therefore required to conduct a balancing exercise between the legitimate interest of the applicant in disclosure against the rights and freedoms of the independent medical assessor. While I acknowledge that you have a legitimate interest in disclosure of the information, the disclosure of the requested information would cause unwarranted harm. Disclosure under FOIA is to the world and therefore the NHSBSA has to consider the overall impact of the disclosure and its duty of care. The expectation of the independent medical assessors is that they will remain anonymous and will therefore not be subject to contact or pressure from claimants or campaigning groups. Given the certainty that the name and/or GMC number will identify them, there is a reasonable expectation that this information will not be disclosed under the FOIA. Disclosing this information would be unfair and as such this would breach the UK General Data Protection Regulation first data protection principle. Please see the following link to view the section 40 exemption in full: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/section/40 Qualifications and experience The NHSBSA does not hold information on the independent medical assessors' qualifications. This is because their medical qualifications and experience are the responsibility of the third-party medical assessment supplier. I hope, however, that the following information provides reassurance on this point: All claims are assessed by the independent medical assessment company with a consistent approach. Each case is considered on its own merits, by an experienced independent medical assessor. The contract with our supplier does not require them to tell us details of their qualifications or their experience.