MAINSYSTEMS 
apply retention criteria without confusing closure with erasure
1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards
This video focuses on how to apply retention criteria without confusing closure with erasure. Follow the sequence of decisions in the example rather than simply memorising a list. Notice who is involved, what information is needed and the expected result. These points help turn the content into a practice that another person can verify. A reporting case may contain data about the reporting person, people concerned and third parties. Data protection must accompany the whole lifecycle, from the form to archiving. This course addresses operational decisions. Legal bases and restrictions on rights require assessment of the specific processing.
A retention schedule must specify data category, applicable rule, starting event, duration and any legally permitted exceptions. Receipt, closure and communication of outcome are different events. Distinguish a statutory maximum from a minimum and an internal review date. Litigation does not automatically override a statutory maximum. Assess any separate lawful use for proceedings and the public-archive rules that actually apply.
Apply the following rule: Section 11 generally provides for deletion of documentation three years after the procedure is closed. Longer retention requires necessity and proportionality to meet legal requirements; record the reason and a review date.
2. Practical Implementation & Procedure
Define information classes, the reference event, duration, review owner and final disposition. Before a scheduled deletion, check the applicable rule, necessity and any pending proceedings. Preserve material only where legally permitted or required; do not invent an extension to a statutory maximum. Include exported copies and archival media, with restricted access. Clearly irrelevant data follow their own deletion rule. Before moving on, turn this procedure into a sequence you could explain to a colleague. Identify the first check, the action that depends on its outcome and the record that allows the decision to be reconstructed. Follow the sequence on screen and identify the point where an error would change the result.
3. Case Study & Compliance Action
A case reaches an internal retention review date while related litigation is pending. The reviewer first establishes whether the date is an internal target or a statutory maximum. Any continued retention needs an applicable legal basis and a defined purpose. If the national maximum prohibits keeping the channel file, the team cannot simply suspend deletion because litigation exists; any separate use as evidence requires its own legal assessment. Now read the case carefully. Separate established facts from information you would still need to confirm. Do not add motives or events that have not been described. This distinction matters when choosing a response proportionate to the information available.
The exercise is as follows: Does reaching the originally planned date permit automatic deletion of everything? Choose an answer and write one sentence explaining it. During the pause, compare your choice with the criteria we have just considered. Also think about the material you would retain to explain the decision later.
No. Identify the rule and starting event, distinguish internal dates from legal limits, and check any applicable duty to preserve or erase. A pending dispute is not a universal extension. Record a lawful decision for originals, copies, attachments and access, with a review date where continued retention is allowed.
One mistake to avoid is: configuring a single deletion period without legally relevant exceptions.
Now apply the national rule to a second decision. The system deletes every case five years after receipt, regardless of the country and any pending proceedings. Is that appropriate?
No. Identify the local rule, starting event and any limits or extensions. A uniform schedule may delete records too early or retain them too long. Document the decision by category, include copies and define who reviews a suspension of deletion, rather than keeping everything indefinitely.