Roger,

The Section 29(3) exemptions are not limited to the police.  Principle two
provides some limit for these exemptions, together with reference back to
principle one.  Accepting that 29(3) exempts from principle one except so
far as the schedules apply, but if the exemption is claimed wrongly
principle one comes into full play.

Any organisation with a legitimate and lawful right may claim a section
29(3) exemption but only for that information which the lack of would
substantially prejudice the purpose the exemption was being claimed for and
only for specific data which is required for that purpose.  e.g. 1. A
request for, or the provision of, the complete medical history of an
individual would be excessive for the purpose if the need was only to prove
attendance at a doctors for particular injuries or the issue of a
prescription. 2. A request for the complete itemised billing for a telephone
or internet account would be excessive if the relevant portion under
investigation covered only two days.

Look to the legislative scope of your organisation.  If it includes a
responsibility to investigate crime, apprehend or prosecute offenders then
you can lawfully claim the exemption.

A DPA 1984 section 28(3) exemption was to my knowledge legitimately claimed
against the police on one occasion to obtain information which would
otherwise have prejudiced an investigation by another body.

Ian


----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Glover <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 12:50 PM
Subject: Issuing notices under Section 29 (3)


>
> Hi,
>
> I have been following the conversations for some time and now have a query
> to ask.
>
> Could anyone provide me with more information on the authority
requirements
> to be able to substantiate or legitimise the issuing of Notices requiring
> information to be provided under this section.
>
> Is it a mechanism that can be used by any organisation in their efforts to
> prevent fraud?
> Must the organisation have a statutory duty in relation to the items in
> Section 29  1 a,b,c?
> Is it relevant to use only by Police and agencies etc?
>
> I am aware supply any replies are not mandatory unless accompanied by a
> Court Order.
>
> I am researching the powers of a Benefits section of a local authority to
> obtain information.
>
> Any information would be welcome.
>
> Thanks
> Roger.
>
>
> The information in this email is confidential and may be legally
privileged.
> It is intended solely for the addressee.  Unless expressly authorised in
> writing, disclosure, copying, distribution and retention, in part or in
> whole, of this email is prohibited and may be unlawful.
>
> Wokingham District Council cannot guarantee that any files attached to
this
> e-mail are free from viruses or any other program code that may be harmful
> to your computer, and, as such, is not liable for any damage that may be
> caused as a result.
>
> Please delete this e-mail if it is not intended for you.



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%