If you're planning to lie, at least try to be convincing
New Forest District Council has been rapped by the Information Commissioner for posting up personal information on its planning website. The problem is not new, and a number of councils have been warned about this in the past. However, having been warned before about this, New Forest's response to the criticism was: "... signatures and other unique information are not now available for public scrutiny".
Out of interest, I went to their planning portal, punched in a postcode and pulled down the documents from a random applications. Guess what? There's the signature, together with all the other personal information. In the very first document I downloaded. So, is the New Forest District Council lying, or do they not understand their own system? Let's hope the enforcement notice is in Monday's post - because I'm off to steal a pony's identity.
![]()
(Partial signature reproduced here)
Recent Comments
Peter Houppe on You couldn't make it up... : I was about to write that you'd be short of tar an...
Peter Houppe on Back to school... : Maybe a different model is easier to understand fo...
Guy Bunker on The spy in the sky?... : Isn't 'feature' creep also an issue - or rather th...
Gordon Scott on The spy in the sky?... : And the public need to know that costs are control...
Paul Bayley on Reputational failure... : Robin's experience is why the feedback system was ...
Robin Wilton on Reputational failure... : Likewise, I see the anonymised "Bidder1" tagging a...
Stephen Powe on Reputational failure... : I couldn't agree more, I've reduced my selling on ...
Rich on A very confusing survey?... : I agree- StrongMail made a huge mistake with this...
Alan Wyatt on Reputational failure... : As a buyer on Ebay there is one other subtle chang...