Skip to main content

NOPE · AI and people

AI incidents

Reports of AI-related harm and adverse experiences affecting people’s safety, wellbeing, rights and livelihoods. Explore what happened and the evidence available.

NOPE’s core concern is when AI communicates with a person, acts on their behalf, or depicts or impersonates them. The tracker also records consequential decisions, claims and privacy harms involving AI. Each case needs a described connection between AI use and the harm, including private information recorded into or disclosed to an AI service. Each account is reviewed for publication; claims may remain uncorroborated or disputed. How we review and count cases

In this selection

Published cases
6
Countries with reported events
4
Located 5 of 6 cases · 1 unknown
Languages in checked sources
4
Recorded for 6 of 6 cases

These figures describe the cases collected by NOPE. Coverage varies with discovery, reporting and available evidence. They do not estimate how often AI-related harm occurs.

Response counts currently use each case’s principal recorded outcome. Further proceedings may be described in its account.

Cases in this selection, counted once in their first known event year. A series may continue beyond that year. Reporting and collection dates are excluded. NOPE has searched recent events more thoroughly than earlier years, so bar heights also reflect collection effort.

Reported severity MediumLow
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

6 of 1005 published cases

Apr 2019United KingdomHM Passport Office photo checker

UK passport photo checker told Black applicants their closed mouths looked open, they say; a BBC test found darker-skinned women flagged more often

The UK government's online passport application uses an automated face-detection check that tells applicants when it thinks an uploaded photo breaks the rules, which include a neutral expression and a closed mouth. In September 2019 PA reported that a young Black man renewing his passport online said the checker mistook his lips for an open mouth, and that to submit the photo anyway he had to write in a comment box that his mouth was closed and he just had big lips. PA also reported that a Black educational technologist said the system told her that her eyes looked closed and that it could not find the outline of her head; she told the BBC she uploaded 10 photographs over a week and each was rated poor, and PA reported that the Passport Office tweeted that it was sorry the service had not worked as it should. In October 2020 a BBC investigation reported that a Black student said she was wrongly told her mouth looked open on each of five photos and got one accepted only by writing a note challenging the verdict. The BBC fed 1,130 passport-style photos of politicians into the checker and found that photos of dark-skinned women were graded poor quality 22% of the time against 14% for light-skinned women; it reported that documents released under a 2019 freedom of information request showed the Home Office knew of the problem but judged overall performance good enough to launch. The Home Office said applicants can override the check, that the checker is a customer aid, and that its systems are improving.

Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources · Added 29/10/2026

Event date unknownNorwaySkatteetaten chatbot

Woman says Norway's tax agency AI chatbot told her a Swedish passport would do as ID, but the Tromsø office refused it; agency says the chatbot was right

In an opinion piece published by Nordnorsk debatt on 20 June 2026, a communications adviser from Nord-Troms who had moved from Sweden to Norway wrote that she needed to identify herself at a tax office to complete her moving notification. Her Norwegian passport had expired and only her Swedish passport was valid. The Norwegian Tax Administration (Skatteetaten) phone line was closed for the day, so she asked the agency's chatbot on its website, describing her case in detail, and she says it answered that she could identify herself with her Swedish passport. She travelled about four hours each way by bus to the Tromsø tax office, where, by her account, staff said the Swedish passport could not be used, told her she could not rely on the chatbot and should phone instead, and she returned with the errand unfinished. She told kode24 she had to take a whole day off work and was first shocked and then very angry; staff also told her, she says, that she should first have registered her Swedish citizenship on the agency's website. She wrote that a colleague put the same question to the chatbot a week later and received the same answer, and that when challenged the chatbot replied that it lacked data on which ID documents are accepted, marking the reply as answered with artificial intelligence. In a reply on 26 June 2026 an acting department director at Skatteetaten wrote that its AI-based chatbot gave entirely correct information in this case, because a Nordic citizen with a valid passport from another Nordic country can use it at a tax office; he told kode24 the chatbot is instructed to answer from skatteetaten.no and that AI-based technology has a margin of error. The digitalisation minister told kode24 the model may seem to have a little way to go. Whether the chatbot's answer or the office's refusal was wrong is disputed, and the date of the trip is not stated.

Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution disputed · 4 sources · Added 28/10/2026

20 Mar 2025 to 14 Nov 2025Event location unknownUnidentified image tool

Amsterdam court jails man who used deepfake technology to pass a bank's face check with other people's IDs and open 47 accounts in their names

The Amsterdam District Court said in March 2026 that a 34-year-old man was suspected of opening 47 bank accounts in other people's names between 20 March and 14 November 2025 by using deepfake technology to mislead a bank's identity-verification system. At the hearing on 17 March 2026, the prosecution said he had beaten ABN AMRO's app check, which compares a face scan with the photo on an identity document, by replacing ID photos with his own and by adjusting his own face photos to resemble the ID photos; the judge noted that a selfie submitted with one woman's identity document showed features of her passport photo. The prosecution said identity documents of the victims in whose names accounts were opened were found on his phone. The man denied knowing of the fraud before late September 2025, and the court reopened the investigation on 31 March to examine his phone data. According to AT5, on 17 June 2026 the court sentenced him to two and a half years in prison, six months of it suspended, and ordered him to pay 13,000 euros to ABN AMRO; AT5 reports that he pasted his victims' facial features onto his own face with AI and that some of the accounts were used for bank-helpdesk fraud and cash withdrawals.

Core concern Medium reported severity Criminal Charges

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources · Added 26/10/2026

23 Feb 2024United KingdomMetropolitan Police live facial recognition

London: Met Police live facial recognition wrongly matched a man to his watchlisted brother; officers stopped him and he later received a settlement

On 23 February 2024 Shaun Thompson, a London community volunteer whom the 2026 judgment describes as 39, walked past a Metropolitan Police live facial recognition deployment near London Bridge station. The High Court records as not in dispute that the system detected a high level of facial similarity between images of him and the watchlist image of his brother, who was the subject of an outstanding arrest warrant, and generated an alert. According to the court's account, officers stopped, detained and questioned him and made him prove his identity, and when he declined to have his fingerprints taken he was threatened with arrest; he says the experience left him angry and distressed. Officers ended the engagement after checking police records about his brother, and he confirmed his identity with a passport photograph on his phone. Big Brother Watch, whose director was his co-claimant, says he was held for almost 30 minutes despite showing several identity documents. His judicial review claim about the stop, issued in May 2024, was withdrawn under a consent order agreed on 18 December 2024 on terms including a settlement sum paid to him. An amended challenge to the Met's revised live facial recognition policy of September 2024, brought with Big Brother Watch's director, was dismissed by the Divisional Court on 21 April 2026; the court said it was not judging the merits of the technology, and the claimants announced plans to appeal.

Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity Lawsuit Dismissed

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 4 sources, 3 underlying accounts · Added 26/10/2026

20 Jul 2026BangladeshUnidentified voice-cloning tool

Natore, Bangladesh: callers told a health-complex employee that his son had been arrested with drugs, then used an AI-cloned copy of the son's voice to win his trust and took Tk 40,000; two men were arrested in Gaibandha in September 2026

According to a press release from Special Response Battalion-13 (SRB-13), relayed by Ajker Patrika, DBC News and NTV, on 20 July 2026 a man who works at the Natore Sadar upazila health complex received a call saying that his younger son had been arrested by police with drugs. The callers then used AI to imitate the son's voice so that the father believed the story, and demanded money to get the son released. He sent a total of Tk 40,000 in two payments through the mobile financial service Nagad, and realised it was a fraud when he reached his son directly. He filed a fraud case at Natore Sadar police station on 25 September 2026. That evening SRB-13 arrested two men, described as the ring's leader and an associate, at their homes in Gobindaganj, Gaibandha, seizing nine mobile phones, a passport and Tk 14,100 in cash; SRB says they admitted involvement during initial questioning and handed them to the police for further legal action, and NTV reports they were sent to Gaibandha district jail through the court on 26 September.

Core concern Low reported severity Criminal Charges

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 01/10/2026

12 Mar 2025 to 15 Mar 2025AustraliaChatGPT

NSW Reconstruction Authority says a former temporary staff member uploaded 2031 Resilient Homes participants' personal data to ChatGPT without authorisation

The NSW Reconstruction Authority says that between 12 and 15 March 2025 a former temporary staff member (called a former contractor in its first notice) uploaded a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet of Northern Rivers Resilient Homes Program information, 10 columns and more than 12,000 rows, to ChatGPT, an AI platform the Authority had not authorised. The Authority disclosed the breach on 6 October 2025, estimating that up to 3000 people were affected, and later said external forensic analysis confirmed that 2031 people had some of their data uploaded, including names, contact details, addresses, dates of birth, sensitive personal and health information and limited financial commentary. It says no driver licence, Medicare, passport or Tax File Numbers were disclosed and that there is no evidence the data is publicly available or was accessed by a third party; whether OpenAI retained or used the data is not addressed. The Authority apologised, contacted affected people with ID Support NSW, offered to compensate the replacement of compromised identity documents and notified the NSW Privacy Commissioner. A program participant told the ABC the information was deeply personal and that they felt concerned. No misuse of the data is reported.

Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Investigation Opened

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 29/09/2026

Cases may have several effects and sources. Mixed accounts qualify when they include a reported harm or adverse experience. People are counted within individual cases where sources support a number; we do not publish a collection-wide total of distinct people.

A source’s existence, the experience it reports and AI’s causal role are separate questions. A lawsuit records allegations unless a subsequent finding establishes them.

Methodology and corrections · Subscribe via RSS · Suggest a case or correction · Find support

Last dataset update: 29/10/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.