MNM Developments (Scotland) Ltd: Critical Legal Risks in Privacy Policy Exposed | Erayaha

## When Privacy Policies Create Million-Pound Risks: A Case Study of MNM Developments (Scotland) Ltd

Imagine a scenario where a single ambiguous clause in your privacy policy exposes your business to GDPR fines of up to €20 million or 4% of annual turnover. Our analysis of MNM Developments (Scotland) Ltd’s privacy and cookies policy reveals several critical legal risks that could result in substantial regulatory penalties, reputational harm, and costly litigation.

1. Ambiguity in Data Processing Purposes and Legal Bases The policy repeatedly relies on the company’s “legitimate interests” as a legal basis for processing personal data, but fails to specify the precise interests or conduct a balancing test as required by Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR. This exposes the company to enforcement actions and potential fines, as regulators increasingly scrutinize vague justifications for data processing.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

We may process data about your use of our website and services (“usage data”). The usage data may include, including your IP address, geographical location, browser type and version, operating system, referral source, length of visit, page views, and website navigation paths, as well as information about the timing, frequency and pattern of your service use. The source of the usage data is our analytics tracking system. This usage data may be processed for the purposes of analysing the use of the website and services. The legal basis for this processing is our legitimate interests, namely monitoringspecifically to monitor and improvingimprove our website and services. We have conducted and documented a legitimate interests assessment (LIA) to ensure that our interests do not override your fundamental rights and freedoms, in accordance with Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR.

Legal Explanation

The original clause lacks specificity regarding the legitimate interests pursued and does not reference the required balancing test. The revision clarifies the interests and documents compliance with GDPR requirements, strengthening enforceability and reducing regulatory risk.

2. Vague Data Retention Provisions The retention policy states that personal data "shall not be kept for longer than is necessary," but also admits that in some cases, it is "not possible...to specify in advance the periods for which your personal data will be retained." This lack of specificity fails to meet GDPR Article 5(1)(e) requirements and could result in enforcement actions or data subject complaints, with potential litigation costs exceeding £50,000 per incident.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

Personal data that we process for any purpose or purposes shall not be kept for longer than is necessary for that purpose or thosethe purposes for which it is processed. We will retain youreach category of personal data as follows: personal data category or categories will be retained for a minimumdefined period of 1 year following the date the, as set out in our data was supplied to usretention schedule, unless a longer retention period is required by law. In some casesWhere it is not possible for us to specify the exact period in advance the periods for which your personal data will be retained. In such cases, we will determineperiodically review the periodnecessity of retention based onand document the following criteria: the periodjustification for continued storage, in accordance with Article 5(1)(e) of retention of personal data category will be determined based on the options you choose in regard to email opt inGDPR.

Legal Explanation

The original clause is vague and does not provide clear retention periods or review mechanisms, which is required by GDPR. The revision introduces a data retention schedule and periodic review, ensuring compliance and reducing legal exposure.

3. Inadequate Data Subject Access Fee The policy imposes a £10 fee for data subject access requests. Under the GDPR (Article 12(5)), organizations may only charge a fee if a request is manifestly unfounded or excessive. A blanket fee is non-compliant and could trigger regulatory investigation and fines.

Legal Analysis

medium Risk

Removed

Added

You may instruct us to provide you with any personal information we hold about you; provision of such information. We will be subjectnot charge a fee for responding to: the payment of your request unless your request is manifestly unfounded or excessive, in which case a reasonable fee may be charged in accordance with Article 12(currently fixed at GBP 105); and the supply of the GDPR. You will be required to provide appropriate evidence of your identity (for this purpose, we will usually accept a photocopy of your passport certified by a solicitor or bank plus an original copy of a utility bill showing your current address).

Legal Explanation

The original clause imposes a blanket fee, which is not permitted under GDPR except in specific circumstances. The revision aligns the policy with GDPR requirements, reducing the risk of regulatory investigation.

4. Risky Third-Party Data Sharing Without Explicit Safeguards The policy allows disclosure of enquiry data to third-party suppliers without detailing safeguards, data processing agreements, or cross-border transfer protections. This omission creates significant risk of unauthorized data use, with potential for class-action litigation and regulatory penalties.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

We may disclose your enquiry data to one or more of those selected third-party suppliers of goods and services identified on our website solely for the purpose of enabling them to contact you so that they can offer, market and sell to youregarding relevant goods and/or services. Each such third partyPrior to any disclosure, we will act as aensure that appropriate data controllerprocessing agreements are in relation to the enquiry data that we supply to it; and upon contacting youplace, each such third party will supply to you a copy of its own privacy policy, which will governand that third party’s useany transfer of your personal data outside the UK or EEA is subject to adequate safeguards as required by the UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018.

Legal Explanation

The original clause lacks reference to data processing agreements and cross-border safeguards, exposing the company to unauthorized data use and regulatory penalties. The revision introduces explicit protections and compliance with data transfer requirements.

Conclusion: Proactive Legal Risk Management is Essential Our examination shows that MNM Developments (Scotland) Ltd’s privacy policy contains critical gaps that could expose the company to multi-million-pound fines, costly litigation, and reputational damage. Proactive redrafting and compliance reviews are essential to mitigate these risks and protect business interests.

Are your privacy terms exposing your business to hidden regulatory liabilities?
How would your company respond to a data subject complaint or regulatory audit?
What steps can you take today to ensure airtight legal compliance?

This analysis is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For actual legal guidance, consult with a licensed attorney. This assessment is based on publicly available information and professional legal analysis. See erayaha.ai’s terms of service for liability limitations.