Data processing addendum

It clarifies the data-protection posture around the operational service rather than pretending every processing question can be answered by a short website policy alone. A head office may need to understand what information Vintage Piggy receives, why it receives it, what role boundaries apply, and where a bespoke signed agreement may still be appropriate before routine use begins.

The charity remains the controller for its own donor-facing activity, branch procedures, supporter communications, and internal governance records. Vintage Piggy does not take over those responsibilities simply because a charity uses an external specialist valuation and buying route. The charity still decides what it collects from donors and what internal approvals are needed before an item is sent.

Vintage Piggy may process contact details, charity identity data, branch or head-office details, parcel references, item photographs, valuation notes, offer records, payment destination checks, and service communications required to operate the route safely. That processing exists to triage enquiries, issue labels, assess items, produce reports, return items when necessary, and complete payments to the charity's registered bank account only.

If a charity's internal governance process requires a signed processor agreement, added security wording, or a defined retention schedule before operational use, that should be raised explicitly at head-office review stage. The website can explain the operating model, but some charities will quite reasonably want a tailored document pack before authorising staff or branches to proceed.

Operational suppliers may include hosting providers, communications tools, postal services, payment rails, and professional advisers where their involvement is necessary and proportionate. The principle is not uncontrolled onward disclosure. It is limited operational use inside the service chain, with disclosures driven by delivery, security, administration, compliance, or legal necessity rather than convenience.

Retention should match the underlying operational reason. Enquiries that never proceed may justify shorter retention than completed transactions with valuation records, payment evidence, and governance reporting attached. Some records may need to be held longer where accounting, dispute, fraud-prevention, audit, or regulatory requirements make that prudent. The correct approach is reasoned retention, not indefinite accumulation.

A charity carrying out governance review should expect Vintage Piggy to treat unnecessary international transfer exposure and unnecessary personal-data capture as risks to be minimised. Charities should also avoid sending irrelevant or excessive personal information in WhatsApp or email traffic. The valuation route does not require casual over-sharing, and disciplined use is part of the governance standard the service is trying to set.

This page is a strong due-diligence summary, but it is not a substitute for a negotiated institutional addendum where a large charity requires one. If procurement, information governance, or legal review demands bespoke clauses, that discussion should happen directly before operational rollout rather than being forced into a generic website-only format.