EvidenceSheet

P8.1 Inquiries, complaints, disputes and compliance monitoring

A process receives, handles, resolves and reports back on questions, complaints and disputes raised by individuals and others, compliance is monitored periodically, and corrections for identified deficiencies are made promptly. Points of focus: data subjects know how to contact the organisation; a process addresses inquiries, complaints and disputes; each complaint's resolution is documented and communicated; compliance with privacy objectives is reviewed, documented and reported to management with remediation plans for problems; instances of non-compliance are documented, reported and corrected or disciplined promptly; and ongoing monitoring checks the how well controls protecting personal information are working.

Source: SOC 2 (2017 Trust Services Criteria), P8.1. The statement above is our statement of the clause, read from the published text and cited so you can check it against the official text, not the instrument verbatim. Open SOC 2 (2017 Trust Services Criteria) in the compliance library.

These are criteria, not controls: you design controls that meet them, and which criteria are in scope follows the categories your report covers (Security always; Availability, Confidentiality, Processing Integrity and Privacy only if chosen). A Type 2 report tests that the controls operated across the period, so the evidence asked for is samples across that period, not one copy.

4
artefacts
1
held by a system
1
at each review
moderate
to go live
SIEM / log platform
where the evidence lives
teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review. To go live: easy when half or more of the artefacts are already held by a system, moderate from a quarter to a half, hard below a quarter.

These are the artefacts auditors commonly ask for on this requirement, our guidance rather than text from the standard. Your assessor decides what is sufficient in your context, and asks for samples across the period when a report covers one.

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

  • Complaint and dispute log with resolutions · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

  • Non-compliance records and corrective actions · Data governance / DLP tooling

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • Privacy contact details published · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Privacy compliance reviews reported to management · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Start with the 1 of 4 artefacts that already live in a system (SIEM / log platform); keep the periodic reviews but log each one as a dated record with a named reviewer.

Common gaps auditors find

Do this for your whole sheet

Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.

Build my evidence sheet

P7.1 Quality of personal information · PI1.1 Quality information about processing objectives, data definitions and specifications