What you have is partial control of these funds, via instructions to your bank, electronic or otherwise, but since it is merely operated on your behalf, you can't unilaterally delete the account. What you can do, is terminate the relationship with your bank.
Yes, it's plainly true that the bank owns (or rents) the hardware, software, databases, etc. and that you're paying for a service through various fees.
But IP is much less clear, and the view that "it's my database so it's my data" is not actually universally legal when the data concerns humans.
The whole notion that someone could have a legal property interest in personal data collected by others is exceedingly modern. Even the most abstract scholarly work presaging the concept can only be traced back a few decades. Similarly, privacy as a concrete, distinct legal concept is only slightly older. (Notwithstanding the historical narrative gymnastics legal and social policy advocates often perform in their attempts to appeal to tradition.)
Suffice it to say, modern concepts regarding privacy and personal data aren't very useful in understanding banking practices and property regimes that can be traced centuries, if not millennia, in nearly identical forms.
This is a relatively straight forward request that maybe doesn't go as far as most people imagine here. Pressing "delete" doesn't instantly delete all user data and it's not expected to. In some cases there may be subsequent steps and some data may be kept for legal reasons*.
The point is very sensible, if I can request the creation of an account or subscription easily in the app, the reverse process should be just as straight forward. If an app can give a one button "create-subscribe-pay" experience then when it comes to deletion you shouldn't suddenly fill out paper forms, or send letters at specific times in the month. And that's if you can even find the info on how to do it in the first place.
Now you can trigger the deletion and know that they have to do something about it, at the very least get clear instructions on how to proceed.
*When it comes to banks, they are subject to laws and regulation that many other companies/services don't have to deal with. Which is why Apples makes this provision:
> We encourage you to review any laws that may require you to maintain certain types of data, and to make sure your app clearly explains what data your app collects, how it collects that data, all uses of that data, your data retention/deletion policies, and more as described in the guideline
Legislation like the GDPR is motivated in part to nullify such arguments.
If you allow such a construct, then "deleting your account" could mean, your immediate personal details (or perhaps even just your access credentials) are erased in some fashion, but nothing else.
This is how legislation like the GDPR gets motivated, of course. The Apple guidelines reference "usage data" elsewhere, and I imagine that's for similar reasons. The deletion clause itself, rather notably, doesn't.
Suppose you're an equipment rental service. But you can't delete the customer's account before they return the equipment (or pay for losing it).
Suppose you're a dog kennel. You can't delete the customer's account while you have their dog in your possession.
Suppose you're the parole division of the police department. Can the "customer" delete their "account"?
This is the problem with dictatorial fiat. The world is full of edge cases.
If the user is allowed according with their contract or law to delete their account they should be able to request that themselves from within the app. This is what I understand from what Apple is requiring the apps to do. It is very similar with GDPR "Right to erasure"/"right to be forgotten".
For your specific cases:
- if a user rented something then they should not be allowed legally to close their account until they return or pay the equipment. If that is in the contract then the delete my account button should be disabled until their contract is terminated/closed.
- if you're a dog kennel it is the same, the user should keep the account until the dog is returned.
- if you are a parole division of the police and the "customer" by law can have their records deleted they should be able to do so.
But now you're exposing the huge problem. It goes from "everybody has to be able to cancel their account in the app" to having to be a contract lawyer steeped in the specifics of every business arrangement and know the law in a hundred different countries to be able to determine if you're allowed to cancel within the app.
Then the app reviewers would either have to be lawyers with plenty of time to make an accurate determination, or they'll be getting it wrong left and right. And it'll obviously be the second one. So now what does the dog kennel owner do, or the OP above, when the app reviewer rejects their excuse?
I also think that the default should be that users should be able to delete their accounts and companies should provide evidence why they have that button disabled or removed.
So in case of review the rule maybe could be: if the user is creating an account in your app, then. the user should have the option to delete their account from the app, unless evidence is provided why the account cannot be deleted because of legal reasons.
In none of those cases are you creating the account within the app.
why not?
1: I can, nothing catastrophic happened. Other than the Meteor codebase.
Just thinking out loud, of course cascading deletes will fail, so I guess you could avoid using true foreign keys to the user table for things which are truly related, and then you'd know what the user did but presumably no PII... Seems insanely sketchy though. Way cleaner to soft delete if you ever need to recover history, which the fintech context amongs many obviously requires
Anyone competent is storing both their requests to those external APIs, as well as those responses, for the entirety of the recordkeeping requirement period.
They have specific regulation regarding record retention.
A lot of firms that deal with personal data may even have snapshots of every single change, sort of immutable - just not global. Again destroying the keys solves the issue of the immediate erasure. The latter is often times impossible due to tape back ups.
GDPR solved this years ago: right to be forgotten does not apply to legal requirements to keep records. Companies must keep those records only for the minimum time though.
And what has it got to do with GDPR. Apple are not the GDPR police in my country. But now you mention it, are the app reviewers going to be trained in GDPR and document retention exemptions, or are they just going to hand out bans?
Getting sick of the down voting from the Apple fanbois of hn.
No, that doesn't seem true.
… Okay, the digital-only ones, maybe. But virtually all other banks I've used make you go to a branch.
The account falls under all the regular retention and reporting requirements, although these companies mitigate some classes of issues with stricter limits, not paying any interest (even though that'd be miniscule), etc.
In fact Wells Fargo is famous for opening account for you without you even thinking about it.
Now it’s only internet banks that do this. They still require lots of KYC documents to open an account.
Digital-only, but a "real" bank in every sense of the word.
Try going to random bank websites and click on "open account".
“…must also allow users to INITIATE deletion of their account”
Capitals mine. So I can allow the initiation of deletion but never actually completely delete the account… and my app complies.