Skip to content

Car Crime U.K.

who knows, who cares?

Menu
  • Events Timeline
  • Stolen Vehicle Info’
    • ‘Form A Squad’ – Ineffective Action
      • The Vehicle Crime Task Force (VCT) – 2019
      • 2022 to 2023 National Vehicle Crime Working Group
    • Stolen Vehicle Recovery – Found in the U.K.
    • Stolen Vehicle Recovery – Found Abroad
    • OPERATION IGNEOUS – reducing reported car theft by 30%
    • Title Law
  • Collision & Crime Reports
    • Police Theft Reports
    • Police Collision Reports
    • Police Disclosure Delays
  • Resources
    • Your Vehicle Theft Insurance Claim
    • Police Contact Emails
  • News
  • Links
    • Abbreviations & Terminology
  • Contact
Menu

220228 Sussex Police & the ICO

28/02/2022
From ICO Casework
To DP0@sussex.police.uk
Subject ICO Case reference: IC-108170-P1J8
Display Name ICO to DC – Fl needed

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to you as the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has received a data protection concern about Sussex Police. The complaint was received by the ICO on 20 May 2021.

The ICU’s role
Our role is to uphold information rights in the public interest, promoting openness by public bodies and data privacy for individuals.

One way that we do that is to consider complaints from individuals who believe there has been an infringement of the data protection law. Section 165 of the Data Protection Act 2018 requires us to take steps to respond to the complaint including investigating it to the extent that we feel is appropriate and informing the complainant of the outcome.

The concern
The concern is about the disclosure of personal data to a third-party. I attach relevant document for your reference.

Next steps
Before we are in a position to make an assessment we need some further information from you. Please provide responses to the following:

  • Describe the procedure for handling incidents of this kind, and state whether the procedure was followed in this instance.
  • Please state if personal data is being processed under UK GDPR or part 3 DPA 2018.
  • If under UK GDPR, what Article 6 lawful basis did you use to disclose personal data?
  • What was the purpose for the disclosure?
  • Why was the disclosure necessary for this purpose?
  • Please provide any further information you feel may be relevant to our assessment.

We ask that you provide responses to the above questions as soon as possible, and no later than 14 days from the date of this email.

I look forward to receiving your response. Please contact me on the number below if you have any queries concerning this process.

Yours sincerely,

David Hunt
Case Officer
Information Commissioner’s Gffice, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF T. 0330 414 6822 F. 01625 524510 ico.org.uk


03/03/2022
From DPO@sussex.police.uk
To ICO Casework
Subject CIM.T1.22 ICO Case reference: IC-108170-P1J8

Dear David

Thank for your letter in response to the complaint raised by [redacted] I have extracted the relevant
information to answer the questions below. Most of the responses have been directly lifted from the email exchanges (as attached), this is to validate the communications from the Collisions Unit to the data subject to re-enforce the current operational processes in place for such incidents.

  • Describe the procedure for handling incidents of this kind, and state whether the procedure was followed in this instance.
  • What was the purpose for the disclosure?
  • Why was the disclosure necessary for this purpose?

Where an incident that falls under Section 170 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 occurs and one of the parties has refused to give their contact details for insurance purposes, the aggrieved party will contact the police to provide the necessary data from the DVLA records. The information shared is the minimum required as required by the legislation to allow civil proceedings to be established.

In this scenario, the aggrieved party used the information to confront the data subject, this is a crime and will be investigated as such. The information shared with the data subject by the Collisions Unit made the purpose for the processing dear to the data subject:

With regards to your enquiry about your personal details being given. Under section 170 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 it is a requirement that the names and addresses of the drivers involved in a damage only collision are exchanged.

Therefore you would have been required to do this at the scene although 1 understand from your explanation why this may not have been possible for you. As details were not exchanged and the collision was reported to ourselves by the other party, part of our role is to try to establish the details of the other driver.

Once these details have been established we are required under section 170 to pass these details onto both parties.
Should you be involved in a similar situation in the future and you are not able to exchange details at the scene then you should report the incident to the Police within 24 hours. Although you had stated that there was not a Road traffic accident or damage the other driver has reported the incident and advised that there is damage to their vehicle therefore section 170 applies and details are required to be exchanged

  • Please state if personal data is being processed under UK GDPR or part 3 DPA 2018.
  • If under UK GDPR, what Article 6 lawful basis did you use to disclose personal data?

Personal data was originally processed under the GDPR as processed by the DVLA. This was then further processed by the police for a law enforcement purpose. The initial processing by the DVLA would be Public Task as there is a requirement to process this data within their official functions. Due to the lawful requirement to make the disclosure under the Road Traffic Act, the information was further processed as it was compatible and necessary for the performance of a task carried out for that purpose by a competent authority. Under the data minimisation requirements, only the relevant and pertinent information was shared with the aggrieved party, this being sufficient to report the claim to their insurance company.

• Please provide any further information you feel may be relevant to our assessment.

Whilst appreciative that this was a traumatic incident for the data subject, this process was established to ensure incidents involving damage to vehicles where a driver refuses to give their details can be resolved through insurance companies. This is also an established and required process for all Police Forces in agreement with the DVLA.

Fortunately, this type of incident is an exception rather then the normal and any crimes committed against either party following the exchange of personal data will be fully investigated. Support will also be offered to the victims, as it was for [redacted].

If you require any further information then please do not hesitate to contact me.

Many thanks

Regards

Information Governance Supervisor
Force Deputy Data Protection Officer
Sussex Police Headquarters, Church Lane, Lewes, East Sussex, BN7 2DZ www.sussex.police.ukResponse


The ICO’s response can be read here

Recent Posts:

  • Moorgate Mercantile Co Ltd v Twitchings
  • Keyless is Meaningless
  • Accusations of Criminality
  • When ‘Sale or Return’ Goes Wrong
  • Thefts Down – Except for Newer Cars!
  • Increase Pre-Crush Retention Period to 28 days?
  • Reducing Vehicle Theft by up to 30%
  • ‘The Others’ … are you among them?
  • Vehicle Abandonments Raise Questions Over Theft Claims
  • The State of Vehicle Taking in the UK: A Crisis of Enforcement, Not Engineering
  • Keystone Krooks – but £1.4 million stolen!
  • 2024 Vehicle Theft – how well (or otherwise) did your constabulary perform?
  • Vehicle Crime. Is Police Language Bluring Facts?
  • Superficial Approach to Vehicle Taking Overlooked Organised Crime
  • Keyless Vehicle Taking – Really?
  • Accuracy & Consistency Required
  • Do we need new legislation?
  • A System Built on Blind Faith? The Flaws in Police Information Dissemination
  • Which? … What?
  • The Rise & Fall of Operation Igneous
  • Vehicle Taking – Quantity not Quality
  • Vehicle Theft: 30 years of Complacency
  • The Devalued Crime Report
  • Vehicle Theft Surge Demands Police Action on Crime Report Disclosures
  • FoIA – Staffordshire Police are not the worst offenders
  • Vehicle Repatriation
  • Crime Number Devaluation
  • Manufacturers Cause Vehicle Thefts …
  • PNC LoS Report Weeding
  • Staff-less-shire Police Report Disclosures
  • W. Mercia Police – RTC Report Disclosures
  • Delaying Finalisation of Insurance Claims (for some)
  • Policing (or not?) Vehicle Theft
  • Fraud Not Theft … face the facts!
  • Cloned Plates: Register of Keepers – Lacking Integrity?
  • Police Theft Report Disclosure
  • Headlamp Dazzle & Eye-Snatching
  • Scrap ‘six-week weeding’ of stolen vehicle VRMs
  • Police Vehicle Theft Reports – A Lack Of Understanding And Standardisation

Legal Disclaimer
The information provided on this website is for general informational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice. While we strive to ensure the accuracy and relevance of the content, laws and regulations change frequently, and the application of legal principles varies based on specific circumstances.

No Legal Advice
Nothing on this website constitutes legal, financial, or professional advice. You should not rely on the information provided here as a substitute for seeking qualified legal counsel. If you require legal advice or guidance, we strongly recommend consulting a licensed solicitor or legal professional.

No Liability
We make every effort to keep the information up to date and accurate, but we do not guarantee the completeness, correctness, or applicability of any content. We accept no responsibility or liability for any errors, omissions, or reliance placed on the information contained within this site.

External Links & Third-Party Content
Any external links or references provided are for convenience only and do not constitute endorsement. We are not responsible for the accuracy, legality, or content of any external sites or third-party materials linked from this website.

User Responsibility
It is the responsibility of all users to verify the accuracy and relevance of any information before relying upon it. If you have a legal issue, you should seek advice from a qualified professional relevant to your situation.

By using this website, you acknowledge and agree to this disclaimer. If you do not agree, you should discontinue use of the site immediately.

© 2025 Car Crime U.K. | Powered by Superbs Personal Blog theme