In message <[log in to unmask]>, at 10:49:34 on Thu,
17 Apr 2008, Carolyn Howard <[log in to unmask]> writes
>the authority would have been better off asking for evidence of
>utility bills covering the relevant period
Utility bills do not prove where you live. In the case in question I've
seen a suggestion that the authority also asked for telephone bills
(from BT perhaps) and maybe when they came back showing the parents did
have [another, as it turns out] house outside the catchment area, then
the next phase started.
>If the authority wants to investigate fraudulent schools admissions it
>can do so, and it can monitor a surveillance operation without
>reference to RIPA. However, the authority is then putting itself at
>danger of breaching the Human Rights Act
Would it not be Best Practice to put the surveillance request through
the "RIPA process", even if RIPA did not apply? There is a precedent for
this, when the police used, in effect, the RIPA criteria rather than the
less stringent DPA 29/3 criteria, in the interval between RIPA being
passed, and being out into force for the collection of Comms Data. In
other words, they were using the more stringent regime voluntarily.
--
Roland Perry
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your needs
To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|