Fleet and sold vehicles

Response

Please find attached two spreadsheets. One provides the data of our fleet list of vehicles and the second is a list of sold vehicles.

 

Not all of the requested details have been provided, as some aspects of the information have been deemed exempt. Please see an explanation of the exemptions applied below.

 

We have removed Vehicle registrations for both the fleet vehicle list and the sold vehicle list. Additionally, the model has been removed from the current fleet list. This is in accordance with the following exemptions:

 

Section 31(1) applies to the fleet vehicle list

Section 40(2) and 38(1) applies to sold vehicle list.

 

This has been explained below

 

With reference to the model and vehicle registration number (VRN) on the fleet list of vehicles, this information is exempt from disclosure under Section 31(1)(a)(b) of the Freedom of information Act relating to law enforcement. In addition, any detail relating to (and including the number of) covert vehicles, has been withheld under the same exemption.

 

This is a prejudice based, qualified exemption, therefore there is a requirement to articulate the harm in disclosure and to consider the public interest. Please see this below:

 

Evidence of harm – Section 31(1)

 

Providing full lists of VRNs (Vehicle Registration Numbers) for marked vehicles provides opportunities for criminality to benefit, or for risks to be extended to members of the public as follows:

 

• Providing a list of police VRN’s provides an infinite pool of registrations that could be used for nefarious purposes: –
• Purporting for vehicles to be “real” police cars, using cloned plates.
• Marked police vehicles are often exempt toll and congestion charges, facilitated by automatic recognition of VRN – cloned vehicles would avoid these charges
• Decommissioned police vehicles are sold at public auction and will re-appear in domestic use, usually driven by members of the public. Making lists of VRNs accessible, for example to OCGs (Organised Crime Groups), may potentially expose unaware members of public to direct challenge and or risk of harm.

Detailed VRN listings will potentially enable an OCG to understand the force’s capability, through the volumes and types of vehicles being operated, for example numbers of ARV & RPU (Armed Response / Traffic), comparative to other models.

 

There are also concerns associated with the release of any information that would identify the purpose of overt police vehicles and any covert vehicles as law enforcement could be adversely affected. The release of this information in relation to police vehicles and policing activities would equip individuals involved in criminal activity with an indication of our capabilities. This information, together with other information already in the public domain would assist those involved in criminal behaviour in identifying the vehicles that are used for specific purposes or covert operations. This would render them useless, hinder the prevention and detection of crime and could compromise ongoing and future enquiries.

 

The information held in relation to the model of our fleet vehicles includes the role. For certain specialist vehicles such as armed response vehicles (ARVs), disclosure of the model would reveal tactical resource information. Consideration has been given to providing the model for other vehicles; however, this would reveal tactical resource information of the remaining vehicles by omission.

 

 

Public Interest Test for Section 31(1)(a)(b)

Considerations favouring disclosure

Disclosure may add value to the accuracy of public debate with regards to resources allocated for the prevention and detection of crime.

 

It is arguable that a VRN plate is openly visible on a marked police vehicle.

 

Considerations favouring non-disclosure

The police Service has a duty to deliver effective law enforcement ensuring that the prevention and detection of crime, apprehension or prosecution of offenders and administration of justice is carried out appropriately.

 

While VRNs are openly visible on a marked police vehicle, formulating and compiling that data into publicly accessible lists (putting it all in one place for criminals including OCG’s, or those with criminal intent to view as a whole picture) adds significant additional context and value to the recipient, which would be detrimental to policing and potentially harmful to the service and in the worst case, to individuals.

 

Disclosing information that would allow the identification of vehicles within a specific unit could compromise the vehicle’s operational purpose and allow these to be targeted. Disclosure may reveal what resources are available for a given role and this information could enable police strength to be determined and circumvented by those intent on committing crime. The release of this information could therefore provide a tactical advantage to offenders which would negatively impact on public safety and undermine the policing purpose. To disclose the vehicle registration plates for all vehicles whether marked or unmarked is that although it can be argued that this information is publicly visible, providing this information as a comprehensive list increases its usefulness to criminals at the detriment to the police service.

 

Disclosing the details of covert vehicles would provide sufficient information to those involved in criminal activity of the capabilities available to the force when carrying out covert activities in certain areas. Disclosures under the Freedom of Information Act are disclosures to the public as a whole, not just those who are requesting the information. Without questioning the motives of the applicant, it is a known fact that criminals could use information disclosed under this legislation to aid their criminal activity. This could result in them taking steps to evade detection and to destroy evidence if they believe that their movements are being monitored. This could also lead to vehicles and officers being identified which would render their covert capabilities useless.

 

Balance Test

The ability to deliver effective law enforcement is of paramount importance. Whilst the value of transparency is recognised, there is no further tangible benefit to identifying covert operation or the role vehicles are attached to. This may be interesting to some individuals however this is as you will appreciate different to being in the public’s interest to know. To disclose this information concerning Police vehicles would have an adverse effect on our ability to prevent and detect crime. Therefore, on balance the factors favouring non-disclosure outweigh those favouring.

 

This serves as a refusal notice under section 17(1) of the FOI Act for any further information relating to your request.

 

Section 40

 

In relation to the sold vehicle list, we are not obliged to provide details of the registration plates requested as this would identify personal information of the new owner of the vehicle. The exemption applicable to this is;

 

• Section 40(2), third party personal information.

 

This is an Absolute exemption so therefore there is no requirement to conduct a harm or public interest test. Any information is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act if it relates to or is supplied by another individual and disclosure of that information would contravene any of the data protection principles set out in:

 

(a) Article 5(1) of the GDPR, and

(b) Section 34(1) of the Data Protection Act 2018;

 

A Freedom of Information Disclosure is a disclosure to the world. Therefore, information that is provided can be viewed by any member of the public. To provide the information together as you have requested may have severe consequences. For example, an individual may be identified by another member of the public. Alternatively, an individual could identify themselves and be aware that their personal data has been used unlawfully.

 

Should the information be provided in a format in which a living individual could be identified this would constitute personal data. This would then become a breach of rights provided under the Data Protection Act 2018. Information held on an individual by Avon and Somerset Constabulary is done so lawfully and is used for a policing purpose in line with the principles set out in the GDPR. Our privacy policy can be viewed here.

 

This serves as a partial refusal notice under section 17(1) of the FOI Act.

 

Section 38 Health and safety

 

With reference to the vehicle registration number (VRN) for the sold vehicle list, this information is exempt from disclosure under Section 38(1)(a)(b) relating to Health and Safety.

 

Section 38 is a prejudice based qualified exemption, therefore there is a requirement to articulate the harm in disclosure and to consider the public interest. Please see this below:

 

Evidence of harm

The information requested relates to Registrations number plates (VRN) and Vehicle information numbers (VINs) of retired police vehicles. If the retired car goes to a new owner who is a member of the public, their new car could possibly be targeted on the assumption that it is still a police vehicle, causing them to be vulnerable and endanger their safety and mental health.

 

Public Interest Considerations

 

Factors favouring disclosure (Section 38)

Disclosure of the requested information may go some way to promote trust in the police service demonstrating that the Constabulary is open and transparent in the retirement of their vehicles and how these are disposed of.

 

Factors favouring non-disclosure (Sections 38)

Release of the information without appropriate safeguards being considered is likely to expose individuals to be targeted by unsavoury individuals and thus risk harm to their mental well-being. The Constabulary takes their responsibility to protect both the physical and mental health and safety of the communities we serve seriously and any information that could jeopardise this will not be released. The public would lose confidence in our commitment to protecting the wellbeing of our community.

 

Balancing test

 

After weighing up the competing interests, I have determined that the disclosure of the above information would not be in the public interest. I believe the importance of the factors favouring non-disclosure outweigh those considerations favouring disclosure. At this time the potential harm outweighs any public benefit. There is no further tangible community benefit in complying with section 1(1) (b) of the Act at this time.

 

This serves as a refusal notice under section 17(1) of the FOI Act.