Dear All,
I think it would be prudent to consider the difference between directed covert surveillance and surveillance. Surveillance is ok. Directed covert surveillance needs RIPA because of the HRA issues.
To put it directly and simply, any time a police (person) walks down the street in uniform they are surveilling people and the cars that are parked in the drive. This does not require RIPA authorisation.
If the council person is badged up wearing their high vis jacket and they knock on the door of the abode, they are not conducting covert directed surveillance and do not need RIPA authorisation. The example often given is that a street warden notices someone fly tipping and moving down the path looking for a second place to dump illegally. If the officer follows them down the road, they are surveilliing them but they do not need RIPA authorisation.
Moreover, one must be aware that there are over 250 different pieces of legislation that allow Council employees to enter the premises, which again would remove the issue of surveillance directed or otherwise and would not require RIPA authorisation.
If you are acting within your remit, i.e. acting within legislation that directs you to enter someone's property to verify the information that is required by the legislation (e.g. Environmental Health inspecting a kennel), they are not conducting surveillance nor do they need RIPA.
Best,
Lawrence
Principal Information Management Officer
Durham County Council
Room 4/140
County Hall
County Durham
DH1 5UF
0191-372-8371
-----Original Message-----
From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Roland Perry
Sent: 05 August 2010 11:40
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [data-protection] Poole Council Decision
In message
<[log in to unmask]
uk>, at 11:20:15 on Thu, 5 Aug 2010, Tim Turner
<[log in to unmask]> writes
>If a person states that a property is empty for the purposes of a
>council tax exemption or discount, how can it be surveillance or
>snooping to check whether the property is indeed empty?
In just the same way as it's surveillance to check what car is parked in
the drive. Someone is invading the privacy of the potential occupants.
>Admittedly, they must check to see that the exemption / discount is
>still being claimed, but what harm is there in checking on an empty
>property? If the property is empty, there will be nobody in it, nobody
>will have been surveilled and nobody's rights would have been infringed.
A stake-out is surveillance, and it doesn't stop being surveillance if
no-one turns up. In the case of an "unoccupied for CT purposes" house,
there may be people legitimately inside (sans furniture) decorating etc.
There's also the possibility of having the wrong address, or as in my
case turning up late[1] after the house has become properly occupied,
and the whole point of a regime like RIPA is to be able to track that
back.
>I don't want to live a council area where people get spied on in the way
>that Poole appeared to have done.
Do you mean observing where the place of residence appeared to be, or
trying to close the stable door after the horse had bolted?
>Equally, I don't want to live in a council area where common sense and
>proportionate methods are not employed to make sure that people don't
>cheat the system.
And you seem to believe that peering through windows is OK, but looking
at the car parked on the drive isn't.
[1] The more I think about this, the more my case seems to be similar to
the one in Poole.
>Tim Turner
>NHS Manchester
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Roland Perry
>Sent: 05 August 2010 11:13
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [data-protection] Poole Council Decision
>
>In message
><[log in to unmask]>, at
>09:18:45 on Thu, 5 Aug 2010, "Bradshaw, Phillip"
><[log in to unmask]> writes
>>Last year I occupied two houses for a period of eight weeks during a
>>staggered move. As far as I was concerned the one I 'lived in' was the
>>one with the lower Council Tax band so I had the empty property relief
>>on the other. That was the only deciding factor which seemed relevant
>to
>>me ....
>
>This happened to me five years ago (I was moving from rented, into a
>purchased house that I was doing up). The rule is, strictly, that a
>house must be completely unoccupied, with no furniture at all, to get
>the exemption. And guess what - the council will perhaps send round a
>snooper to peer in the windows and check.
>
>I wonder if this counts as 'directed surveillance'? It is, according to
>a lawyer on another list I subscribe to. I wonder if Poole have
>reviewed/stopped this practice too?
>
>In my case the chap had a wasted journey, because he only arrived after
>I'd fully moved (and I'm sure after I'd told the council's other hand
>that this had happened, and the other house had been fully signed over
>to the next occupant).
--
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)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Help protect our environment by only printing this email if absolutely necessary. The information it contains and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are only intended for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may be unlawful for you to use, share or copy the information, if you are not authorised to do so. If you receive this email by mistake, please inform the person who sent it at the above address and then delete the email from your system. Durham County Council takes reasonable precautions to ensure that its emails are virus free. However, we do not accept responsibility for any losses incurred as a result of viruses we might transmit and recommend that you should use your own virus checking procedures.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|