FOI disclosure log

EXEMPTIONS

Section 40(2) Personal Information

The information you have requested includes the personal data of  3rd Parties.  Under the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA), personal data includes any information that can identify, or, together with other information, can identify a ‘living individual’.

The Council has to consider whether disclosure of the information would comply with any of the data protection principles set out in the DPA, as well as whether disclosure would contravene Article 21 of the GDPR (general processing: right to object to processing).  In this case the Council is unsatisfied that disclosure would be fair and lawful.

As such the Council considers S40(2) Personal Information of the FoI Act 2000 to be engaged. This is an absolute exemption.

Section 31 Prevention and detection of Crime

The information which you have requested is exempt under section 31(1)(a) ‘Law enforcement ’, of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, states:

Information which is not exempt information by virtue of section 31 is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice the prevention or detection of crime.

We have applied Section 31 (1) (a) to your request because of the risk of increased crime that would likely occur if a list of empty properties was released to the wider public under a freedom of information request. We consider that the public disclosure of the requested information would likely increase the risk to empty properties of illegal entry and illegal use if entered. 

Empty properties are often associated with criminal activity from organised local gangs and whilst squatting itself is not an offence, it is associated with criminal activity. Disclosure of the list would be of use to squatters and would, on a balance of probability, lead to significant harm in the form of criminal activity such as vandalism. It is also likely that organised gangs will use the information for criminal purposes. Further, such properties may be exposed to a greater risk of arson or criminal damage, which if carried out may endanger other persons in neighbouring properties. 

The Information Tribunal decision which related to a request for list of empty properties within the London Borough of Bexley ruled that the Council in this case was not required to disclose the addresses of empty properties within the borough where they are owned by individuals. 

The Tribunal found that disclosure of such a list would be likely to have a significant negative impact on the prevention of crime. Their conclusion was that the information is exempt under section 31(1)(a) of the Act on the basis that disclosure of a list of empty and uninhabitable properties would be likely to prejudice the prevention or detection of crime.

We accept that there is some public interest in knowing how local properties are used and occupied and that such information may be useful for a variety of purposes including, for example, demographic research. We also understand the pressing issue of bringing empty properties back into use where this is possible.

However on balance, we consider that there is a greater public interest in the withholding of the information due to the safety considerations of the public.