 |
 |
Paul I have examined a number of statutory provisions which relate to personal data use and in my view these are generally very narrow in application. Making the data public in relation to a statutory obligation does not necessarily extend to allow a controller to process to actively despatch to a third party for what is clearly a marketing purpose without consideration of both principle 1 and section 11 rights. I do not believe the planning authority have a statutory obligation to send to an Insurer simply an obligation to make available for viewing (given someone may wish to challenge the plans). If there was a statutory obligation to send it to an Insurer why has this not been happening before (unless planning legislation has recently changed on this point) and why would Insurers pay for something they can get for free, after all we still have to ensure we are prudently managing shareholder / policyholder funds. Given there is no proven statutory right then the planning authority are in fact using the data for a different purpose to the one it was collected for (from planning purpose to trading in data). This new purpose needs assessment against the provisions of the Act in its own right. As a DP manager at an Insurer I recommend that to protect ourselves when purchasing 'cold lists' from third parties that some form of warranty is obtained from the seller that the Data Protection Act has been complied with and the list is free from DP liability issues and can be used for marketing purposes given this is why we wish to buy it. We still then have the overhead of filtering it against our own existing marketing objectors list to ensure fairness and support section 11 before we could use. Now I come to think of it this is probably why our marketing division in their enthusiasm to market no longer seek DPA advices on this point, perhaps they hope to plead ignorance. I think I feel a compliance audit coming on......... David Wyatt -----Original Message----- From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Stuart Lynch Sent: 06 December 2000 16:38 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Planning Register disclosures Paul I would be inclined to take advice from a lawyer who knows the Planning laws on this one - it all hinges on whether the same provision exists as for the electoral register, ie the register must be made available to anyone requesting a copy, and the Electoral Registration Officer may make a charge for the supply. If such a provision does not exist, you may be on safe ground in opposing the disclosure, but I can't be optimistic - as Leigh-Pollitt & Mullock say in "The Data Protection Act Explained", Section 34 is "an exemption which, if fully exploited, could drive a coach and horses through the good intentions of the Act....For those individuals who have taken great care to tick opt-out boxes or to register with the Mailing Preference Service, it can be particularly galling if their information is made available in this way". Regards Stuart -----Original Message----- From: Paul Couldrey [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: 28/11/2000 11:12 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Planning Register disclosures A question for all the local authority people out there (and perhaps the HE people will find the discussion useful). The planning department are requesting that they send the register of planning applications to an Insurance company, for that company to offer services etc. The department are claiming that s.34 exemption for disclosure i.e.. the list has to be made available to the public etc, and as such s.27 covers further disclosures. Personally I argue not, as s. 34 states available to public, is the company legally to be viewed as the public? Equally these exemptions quoted mention nothing about Direct Marketing s.11, surely this is Direct Marketing. As such I feel that the principle of fairly obtaining the data is breached as the data subjects are unaware of the secondary use of the data, and this purpose is not in the notified entry, so 2nd principle problems too. Any thoughts?? Paul Couldrey Data Protection Officer Wolverhampton Council 'the views expressed are personal and may not necessarily reflect those of Wolverhampton Council, unless explicitly stated otherwise' ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com **********************************************************************