CaRT's breach of Data Protection Act?

A FURTHER dimension to the current concerns over the apparent increasing number of speeding cyclists on the newly resurfaced towpaths, is the yet further imbalance in the rights of the boater versus what seems like everyone else, writes John Howard.

As we are all aware, there is no requirement for a cyclist to take out third party liability insurance when racing with their pals along the towpaths—or the latest time trials web site and mobile technology that provides for cyclists to attempt to beat their own 'personal best' when out for a ride.

Boater sued

I seem to remember an article last year where a cyclist rode too close to a boat and caught it's mooring pin, and the cyclist successfully sued the boater. However, if a cyclist (through no fault of the boater) loses control and collides with a boat, or causes a stone or similar to break a window, or forces a walker, baby in pram, CaRT strimming team etc, etc, etc into the side of a boat—causing damage to said boat—what chance would the boater have in getting the name and address of the offending cyclist in order to seek compensation in the courts, or otherwise? None.

However, CaRT's recently publicised draft changes to the private boaters' boat licence terms and conditions, state in section 7.8 that . . .

'You agree that we may provide your relevant personal details including your contact details such as your name and address to any person (or the insurer of any person) who we believe has a reasonable interest in an incident or alleged incident involving the Boat which will generally be the case where for example personal injury or damage to property may have occurred'.

On the 3rd of February I wrote to Damien Kemp the Editor of the CaRT Boaters Update expressing my concerns . . .

Serious breach of Data Protection rules?

'Surely this would represent a serious breach of Data Protection rules? I notice it says ANY person! So, anyone who might have a score to settle can concoct a story for CaRT and then turn up at my home and harass me—or worse?

This cannot be legally or morally right? There must be better ways to handle such requests for personal data. I'd be interested to hear the CaRT response to this section.'

The following day, I received the following swift response from Damian . . .

'Thanks for your email. At the moment our legal team are reviewing the feedback we're getting and will be drawing up responses. I've sent yours across to them to review. One of the team will be in touch (I'll also be posting their responses on the licensing section of our website...). Sorry I couldn't directly answer your question but I will endeavour to get it answered'.

Reviewed?

One might reasonably assume that someone from the legal team might have reviewed these T&C's before they went public (accepting however that this is still a Draft version), and one would have hoped that their 'Data Protection Alarm might have been blaring out loud and clear even at the draft stage.

I mean, you try and ask any of the Enforcement Team how it is that a particular boat, or even several boats, have been sitting on visitor moorings for months on end along the GU and the immediate response is: "I can't comment as its against the Data Protection Act"—and yet it would appear that a policy writer in CaRT didn't think there might be a problem with providing your relevant personal details including your contact details such as your name and address to any person who we believe has a reasonable interest.

Still waiting

I am still waiting for a response from the legal team, or an update on the Boaters Update—not that waiting two weeks is an issue, as I can imagine there are several areas that may need revision with feedback coming from those boaters with more tenacity than I when trawling through pages and pages of legal jargon.

Hopefully CaRT will give boaters personal data the same weight in terms of security as it seems to with it's own data—which seems to be withheld for the most tenuous of reasons (as the many requests under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 published in articles in narrowboatworld bear testament).

I'm hoping to hear that this particular section is rewritten, but it does seem to further underline the one sided nature of things when it comes to boaters versus every other individual or group associated with the waterways.

Send your feedback

So I urge you all to review this document very carefully and send your feedback to CaRT, otherwise any apathy on the part of boaters may surely come back to bite us when we least expect it.

Here's the link: <CLICK>