Report praises council use of communications data for investigations

Local authorities are making good use of communications data to investigate offences which cause harm to the public and – contrary to media reports – are not using it to investigate offences of a trivial nature such as dog fouling or littering, the annual report of the Interception of Communications Commissioner has said.

Local authorities do not have power to intercept telephone calls or other forms of communication, but are permitted to acquire certain types of data for the purpose of preventing and detecting crime.

The data is typically used by trading standards teams to tackle individuals who rip off consumers, cheat the taxpayer, deal in counterfeit goods or prey on the vulnerable and the elderly. Environmental health departments and housing benefit investigators also occasionally make use of the powers.

Sir Paul Kennedy said 131 local authorities had notified him that they had made use of the powers to acquire communications data during the course of the year.

The Commissioner’s office conducted 31 inspections of councils during the year. Seventeen of the councils inspected had made use of service use data and the inspectors “were satisfied that it was necessary to obtain it and it was proportionate to the investigative objectives”, the report said.

However, one unnamed authority was criticised for obtaining data before carrying out checks to identify the relevant subscribers. “At that stage in the process there was no information or intelligence to indicate whether the telephone numbers or their subscribers were associated with criminal or illicit activity and potentially they could have been innocent members of the public who were in contact with the suspect for perfectly legitimate reasons,” the report said, adding that the council concerned had since changed its working practices.

Of the 31 councils inspected, 23 achieved good or better standards with the remaining eight given a “satisfactory” rating.

Three inspections revealed technical breaches of the relevant Act and code of practice, but the inspectors were “satisfied that they had no bearing on the justifications for acquiring the data and the data had been used for a correct statutory purpose”.

The report highlighted cases where the local authorities had made effective use of data. Wolverhampton City Council acquired data as part of investigations into the large-scale manufacturing and distribution of counterfeit media products, which caused an estimated £1m loss to legitimate businesses.

A joint investigation by Solihull Borough Council and West Midlands Police also used data to investigate a rogue builder who had obtained approximately £200,000 by fraud from his victims over an 18-month period. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to four years in imprisonment.

“It is extremely unlikely that he would have been brought to justice if the investigating officers had not made effective use of the powers to acquire communications data,” the report said.