Local authorities always hide behind data protection and confidentiality. This case shows what they should not have deemed confidential.
Commissioner Jacobs CH/1821/2006
[am4show have=’g1;g5;’ guest_error=’guest’ user_error=’renewal’ ]
Confidentiality
“30. I said that I would come back to the issue of confidentiality. Remember that the local authority had not disclosed to the landlord that the claimant considered it to be in his overriding interests to continue to receive payments of housing benefit because of outstanding repairs. I anticipated a lively discussion with Mr Mason on the scope of confidentiality. In this, I was disappointed. As soon as I raised the issue, he admitted that his staff could be over zealous in relying on confidentiality in a way that prevented landlords from effectively exercising their rights. That accords with my experience of local authorities in respect of both confidentiality and data protection.31. There may be cases in which genuine issues of confidentiality arise and it will be difficult to allow the landlords to exercise their rights effectively without disclosure. I leave that issue to an appropriate case. This one is not appropriate. If A reports an ongoing dispute with B, I do not understand how it can ever be appropriate to keep that confidential from B who is said to be party to it. The tribunal was right to criticise the local authority’s approach and reasoning, which was entirely self-fulfilling. Having said that, however, I do understand the difficulties which the staff of local authorities feel when they contemplate the possible consequences to the person seeking confidentiality, or the potential liability to which the authorities, or even themselves, may become liable, if disclosure is wrongly made.”
[/am4show]
