Do you want to keep the NZTA's opt out? [Archive]

davereid

29th March 2012, 06:39

Its possible to OPT-OUT of having the personal details the NZTA collect on you in the motor vehicle register being sold.

The opt-out was introduced after public concern that it enabled towies, dodgy car dealers, and general scumbags to find out a persons name and address, by filling out a form MR31.

Many vehicles were stolen by this mechanism, and there were rapes and even murders where the person was tracked down from the MVR record.

The NZTA are not enforcing the OPT-OUT. The MR31 is no longer available at the post-shop, and every application is supposed to be vetted, but this is not happening. They have declined only a handful of MR31 applications (less than ten out of tens of thousands of applications have been declined.)

Worse, they have given automatic MR31 approval (ie no vetting required) to a wide range of companies and individuals.

If you want the protection of the OPT OUT back, we need your help.

A simple email to info@nzta.govt.nz with OIA REQUEST in the subject line is a start.

Ask them how many MR31 requests (including preapproved electronic ones) have been made on opted out persons, and how many have resulted in the release of the information. If you aren't happy that they sell you personal details, or it means you don't trust them enough to use your main or real address, say so.

The NZTA don't think anyone is watching, and they don't think anyone cares. A few emails will be of immense importance in getting the opt out back.

Thanks

Dave

davereid

30th March 2012, 06:27

This is important guys.

ANYONE can get your name and address etc just from your number plate as long as they know how to do it.

And DOZENS of companies, many who may have dodgy employees have direct access, completely unchecked.

If you want the information the government force you to give them, kept confidential, send that email.

James Deuce

30th March 2012, 07:28

Done. Will let you know the results. Will be interesting to see if everyone gets the same answer.

placidfemme

30th March 2012, 07:42

Yup, also done. Will let you know if they bother to reply.

James Deuce

30th March 2012, 15:21

Just got a reply to say that they are processing the request.

slofox

30th March 2012, 16:47

Did this ages ago.

placidfemme

30th March 2012, 18:22

Just got a reply to say that they are processing the request.

Ditto

+10char

mashman

30th March 2012, 18:44

Done........

rustic101

30th March 2012, 18:48

I may have missed something but have they revoked this option to opt out???

Someone should let Fair Go know as they were very hot on this topic..

I'm not a media whore so 'bags not'.

mashman

30th March 2012, 19:04

It doesn't say anything about opting out (https://transact.nzta.govt.nz/transactions/ReqPersonalInfoAccess/entry.aspx), just that they'll think about wether or not they'll sell your details.

Oblivion

30th March 2012, 19:35

Isn't this an invasion of privacy kind of thing? AFAIK, No-where in the process of owning a vehicle does it say that you consent having your licence and rego details avaliable to be purchased? :shutup:

FJRider

30th March 2012, 19:48

The opt-out was introduced after public concern that it enabled towies, dodgy car dealers, and general scumbags to find out a persons name and address, by filling out a form MR31.

Many vehicles were stolen by this mechanism, and there were rapes and even murders where the person was tracked down from the MVR record.

The NZTA are not enforcing the OPT-OUT. The MR31 is no longer available at the post-shop, and every application is supposed to be vetted, but this is not happening. They have declined only a handful of MR31 applications (less than ten out of tens of thousands of applications have been declined.)

It seems little thought has been given by any, as to the benefits of the system. If somebody wants to find out where your car (and you) live ... they just do it the hard way. By following you.
Some may just see it as a (possible) way of escaping parking tickets ... or the results of their actions in/on their vehicle.
If NZTA are not enforcing the Opt-out ... it's because they have no legal requirement to. Otherwise they would be.

davereid

30th March 2012, 20:35

It seems little thought has been given by any, as to the benefits of the system. If somebody wants to find out where your car (and you) live ... they just do it the hard way. By following you.
Some may just see it as a (possible) way of escaping parking tickets ... or the results of their actions in/on their vehicle.
If NZTA are not enforcing the Opt-out ... it's because they have no legal requirement to. Otherwise they would be.

No. Even if you have opted out of having your personal details being provided to private companies and individuals you were never able to opt out of having them available for law enforcement.

This is about the NZTA making them available to virtually anyone who asks, just like the old days. Fill out the MR31, pay the fee, get the details. Individuals have to state a reason for each application, but companies have been able to sate a 'generic reason' and thereafter all of there requests are automatically approved.

I have been sent figures that show over 30,000 MR31 requests have been made since the Opt-Out was introduced, and the NZTA have declined 9 of them.

Pretty clearly, that wasn't the intent of the opt out, and its obviously not working with those kind of numbers.

FJRider

30th March 2012, 20:50

No. Even if you have opted out of having your personal details being provided to private companies and individuals you were never able to opt out of having them available for law enforcement.

This is about the NZTA making them available to virtually anyone who asks, just like the old days. Fill out the MR31, pay the fee, get the details. Individuals have to state a reason for each application, but companies have been able to sate a 'generic reason' and thereafter all of there requests are automatically approved.

I have been sent figures that show over 30,000 MR31 requests have been made since the Opt-Out was introduced, and the NZTA have declined 9 of them.

Pretty clearly, that wasn't the intent of the opt out, and its obviously not working with those kind of numbers.

Any requests are in writing ... and they can be spoken to if said vehicle goes missing. Council parking enforcement departments have access ,as do many private parking places. Vehicle dealers have access to determine actual owners in the sale of a vehicle. And number of previous owners ... etc.

Does "The guy off the street" have access ... ???

The people that "opted out" are the only one's who think it isn't working ... (to the way they thought it would)

Has anybody that opted out ... have had their vehicle stolen, or privacy invaded. (What numbers have been been reported as such ... ???)

davereid

31st March 2012, 08:25

Any requests are in writing ... and they can be spoken to if said vehicle goes missing. Council parking enforcement departments have access ,as do many private parking places. Vehicle dealers have access to determine actual owners in the sale of a vehicle. And number of previous owners ... etc.

Does "The guy off the street" have access ... ???

The people that "opted out" are the only one's who think it isn't working ... (to the way they thought it would)

Has anybody that opted out ... have had their vehicle stolen, or privacy invaded. (What numbers have been been reported as such ... ???)

OK, one by one.

Any requests are in writing ... and they can be spoken to if said vehicle goes missing.
You have had to fill out an MR31 for years. In the case of the murder I mentioned it was the MR31 that linked the criminal to the victim. As it should have, as it how he found the victim.

Council parking enforcement departments have access ,as do many private parking places.
Councils etc have always and will always have access. Private parking companies appear to have access. Maybe they shouldn't. Winston in another thread described how this enabled his Father to track him and his Mother down and enforce some home justice.

Vehicle dealers have access to determine actual owners in the sale of a vehicle. And number of previous owners ....
The registered person is not the legal owner.

There is no relationship between the two.

Even if there were, a vehicle dealer (or anyone else) can check that the person offering to sell a vehicle is the registered person simply by checking here. https://transact.nzta.govt.nz/transactions/ConfirmRegisteredPerson/entry.aspx.

Other services provide the vehicles ownership history, without disclosing the names of the owner. The dealer can still tell the number of owners, and if its been a taxi etc.

The issue is, hundreds of thousands of people opted out expecting it would improve their privacy, safety and security. And with only 9 out of 30,000+ queries declined by the NZTA its pretty clear thats not happening.

And if there is any contract that needs enforcing, hit and run accident damage etc, then its an enforcement issue, and all thats required to get the information for your insurer is a complaint to the police.

FJRider

31st March 2012, 13:37

You have had to fill out an MR31 for years. In the case of the murder I mentioned it was the MR31 that linked the criminal to the victim. As it should have, as it how he found the victim.

A paper trail that can be followed. Those abusing the system (even those assisting in the abuse of the system) can be prosecuted.

Councils etc have always and will always have access. Private parking companies appear to have access. Maybe they shouldn't. Winston in another thread described how this enabled his Father to track him and his Mother down and enforce some home justice.

No doubt the matter was referred to the police for further action.

[The registered person is (always) not the legal owner.

There is no relationship between the two.

If NO relationship applies ... why is an owner/phyisical address required on applications for vehicle registration... ???

[Other services provide the vehicles ownership history, without disclosing the names of the owner. The dealer can still tell the number of owners, and if its been a taxi etc.

If they have no need of the service ... any application for the information would be declined. The fact that some applications have been declined ... is some proof the system is working. Maybe not to the satisfaction of those "found" though.

[The issue is, hundreds of thousands of people opted out expecting it would improve their privacy, safety and security. And with only 9 out of 30,000+ queries declined by the NZTA its pretty clear thats not happening.

And what percentage of that "30,000+ queries" were subject to the misuse of this system. And what percentage of those were reported to police ... ???
An option in registration is to list your address at one that you are NOT living at. Simple really ...

[And if there is any contract that needs enforcing, hit and run accident damage etc, then its an enforcement issue, and all thats required to get the information for your insurer is a complaint to the police.

That has always been the case ... just some preferred to find the persons responsible, and meet out their own justice. (often deservedly so in some cases) Do those that try to hide in an "Opt-out" scheme in such cases, have any right to privacy,safety and security .... ???

davereid

31st March 2012, 13:44

A paper trail that can be followed. Those abusing the system (even those assisting in the abuse of the system) can be prosecuted. No doubt the matter was referred to the police for further action.
Yes, there was a murder. It was referred to police. So were several rapes and assaults. No doubt some went unreported. Best the crime never occured don't you think ?

If NO relationship applies ... why is an owner/phyisical address required on applications for vehicle registration... ???
The registered person is responsible for Tolls and tickets. They are not necessarily the legal owner.

If they have no need of the service ... any application for the information would be declined. The fact that some applications have been declined ... is some proof the system is working. Maybe not to the satisfaction of those "found" though.
Nope. They dont vet any of the electronic applications.

And what percentage of that "30,000+ queries" were subject to the misuse of this system. And what percentage of those were reported to police ... ???
An option in registration is to list your address at one that you are NOT living at. Simple really ...
So you would rather lie than have the system made safe ?

That has always been the case ... just some preferred to find the persons responsible, and meet out their own justice. (often deservedly so in some cases) Do those that try to hide in an "Opt-out" scheme in such cases, have any right to privacy,safety and security .... ???
Yes. No one has the right to bash other people up, or meet out their own justice. Its the entire reason the database should be kept confidential.

GingerMidget

31st March 2012, 16:15

davereid

31st March 2012, 16:27

If you don't believe in the sanctity of the 'opt out' do what I do. Register it under a different address. I have both opted out, and chosen to register my stuff to a different address. Purely because if the person I'm hiding from goes to that address, well he will leave pretty flamin quickly. Got your tinfoil helmet yet?

Interesting paradox that you have to break the law and lie about where you live to stop yourself getting a bashing, yet you think people who want the opt-out to work are paranoid.

You will love it soon when the NZTA start to verify addresses, so you will find your old mate on your doorstep.

What ya gonna do then ? Whine on here that the opt out doesn't work ?

FJRider

31st March 2012, 17:35

Yes, there was a murder. It was referred to police. So were several rapes and assaults. No doubt some went unreported. Best the crime never occured don't you think ?

Was these crimes before or after the recent changes as to who gets the information ???

The registered person is responsible for Tolls and tickets. They are not necessarily the legal owner.

No ... actually the DRIVER of the vehicle, is responsible for the toll's and tickets. Under the current leglislation, registered/legal owner must provide details of who was the driver at the time of tolls/tickets issued to that vehicle. I think liable for a $10,000 fine if they don't provide those details.

Nope. They dont vet any of the electronic applications.

There is still the electronic "trail" leading to who applied for the infomation. Any complaints may result in their ability to apply for the information in the future ... be denied.

So you would rather lie than have the system made safe ?

A secure address where you can recieve mail (if only registration mail) like a trusted friend, or realitive, or non residential (work) address .... is not lying. Perfectly legal. And has been a common practice for some time.

[Yes. No one has the right to bash other people up, or meet out their own justice. Its the entire reason the database should be kept confidential.

Even if they totally deserved it ... yes.
Back to the "I have my rights arguement" ... contact with "offending" persons in those case ... did not always end in "the bash" result. Some (both parties) were happy to keep it away from the Police/court system.
Usually for reasons to avoid Police/public attention ... are reasons the ability to get their information is being argued against.

davereid

31st March 2012, 17:57

Was these crimes before or after the recent changes as to who gets the information ???
It doesnt matter as the information is still freely available.

No ... actually the DRIVER of the vehicle, is responsible for the toll's and tickets. Under the current leglislation, registered/legal owner must provide details of who was the driver at the time of tolls/tickets issued to that vehicle. I think liable for a $10,000 fine if they don't provide those details.
The registered person is not necessarily the owner. It doesnt matter how many times you say it, it wont change.

There is still the electronic "trail" leading to who applied for the infomation. Any complaints may result in their ability to apply for the information in the future ... be denied. You mean after they have murdered raped or beaten someone up their access will be revoked ? Thats handy.

A secure address where you can recieve mail (if only registration mail) like a trusted friend, or realitive, or non residential (work) address .... is not lying. Perfectly legal. And has been a common practice for some time.
So you are arguing that you dont need the opt out because you can use a fake address. Wait till the address you claim is verified, then that wont work. In the mean time, the "trusted friend, or realitive" can get the bash on your behalf.

Even if they totally deserved it ... yes.
Back to the "I have my rights arguement" ... contact with "offending" persons in those case ... did not always end in "the bash" result.
So you only bashed people sometimes ? Cool, you are a nice guy.

Some (both parties) were happy to keep it away from the Police/court system Usually for reasons to avoid Police/public attention ... are reasons the ability to get their information is being argued against. Yes your have said why you like things to be kept clear of the police.

GingerMidget

1st April 2012, 17:18

Fake address eh? Its been in my family since before I was born, and anyone from NZTA is more than welcome to see if it exists or not.

I'd explain it, but I don't care what you think.

FJRider

1st April 2012, 18:07

It doesnt matter as the information is still freely available.

All the information is available in MANY places ... depends on where you look.

The driver of the vehicles are responsible for toll and ticket fee's (and always has been) ... and registered owners are required to give information to the relevant authorities if asked (subject to a large fine if they don't) regardless who the LEGAL owner is. Nothing will change that.

My registered address is not FAKE ... my mail gets delivered there ... including power and telephone bills .... and I recieve it all.

Non-existant address's ARE illegal though.

I never needed to bash anybody ... and if some are more than happy to pay for repairs ... than get the matter handed back to police ... all the better for me.

scracha

1st April 2012, 19:29

I've stolen this and posted on farcebook. Email sent. Ran out of bling. People DO THIS. You don't want any fuckwit with eyes on your motor finding out where you store it. You really don't want any fuckwit with eyes on your missus finding out where she lives.

Its possible to OPT-OUT of having the personal details the NZTA collect on you in the motor vehicle register being sold.

The opt-out was introduced after public concern that it enabled towies, dodgy car dealers, and general scumbags to find out a persons name and address, by filling out a form MR31.

Many vehicles were stolen by this mechanism, and there were rapes and even murders where the person was tracked down from the MVR record.

The NZTA are not enforcing the OPT-OUT. The MR31 is no longer available at the post-shop, and every application is supposed to be vetted, but this is not happening. They have declined only a handful of MR31 applications (less than ten out of tens of thousands of applications have been declined.)

Worse, they have given automatic MR31 approval (ie no vetting required) to a wide range of companies and individuals.

If you want the protection of the OPT OUT back, we need your help.

A simple email to info@nzta.govt.nz with OIA REQUEST in the subject line is a start.

Ask them how many MR31 requests (including preapproved electronic ones) have been made on opted out persons, and how many have resulted in the release of the information. If you aren't happy that they sell you personal details, or it means you don't trust them enough to use your main or real address, say so.

The NZTA don't think anyone is watching, and they don't think anyone cares. A few emails will be of immense importance in getting the opt out back.

Thanks

Dave

davereid

1st April 2012, 21:51

My registered address is not FAKE ... my mail gets delivered there ... including power and telephone bills .... and I recieve it all.

OK, so you and GingerMidget are fine as you have alternative addresses. Thats great, well done.

I'll continue advocating for the majority of people who have their real place of residence recorded.

winston

5th April 2012, 07:11

Did this ages ago.

yea i opted out but it didnt help they still gave my addess to tonament parking. i have complained as i was opt out the bastards

slofox

5th April 2012, 07:19

yea i opted out but it didnt help they still gave my addess to tonament parking. i have complained as i was opt out the bastards

I've emailed them again. No reply as yet. Bastards!

oneofsix

5th April 2012, 07:32

yea i opted out but it didnt help they still gave my addess to tonament parking. i have complained as i was opt out the bastards

The opt out only stopped them selling your address to people who just wanted to buy a list of addresses, people like direct marketing companies. When I read what you were opting out of it was F all of nothing.

If a company or person had a seeming legitimate reason for needing you address they could still obtain it. Tow companies etc are in a business where they could have reasons for wanting owners addresses so to save money I can imagine NZTA would want to give them a kind of blanket access rather than go through the one off process each and every time they had say towed a vehicle and were trying to track the owner (that happens, rignt? :laugh:).

I think those people who tried to pay their tolls via credit card have a bigger bitch (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10796837) but this is a concern about just how bad their systems, perhaps it is another one of Crusher's initiatives to get people to pay the govt.
Perhaps they will now mail all opt outers the addresses of all the others that have opt'd out. Something to look forward to. :eek5:

davereid

6th April 2012, 08:58

The opt out only stopped them selling your address to people who just wanted to buy a list of addresses, people like direct marketing companies. When I read what you were opting out of it was F all of nothing.

If a company or person had a seeming legitimate reason for needing you address they could still obtain it. Tow companies etc are in a business where they could have reasons for wanting owners addresses so to save money I can imagine NZTA would want to give them a kind of blanket access rather than go through the one off process each and every time they had say towed a vehicle and were trying to track the owner (that happens, rignt? :laugh:).

I think those people who tried to pay their tolls via credit card have a bigger bitch (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10796837) but this is a concern about just how bad their systems, perhaps it is another one of Crusher's initiatives to get people to pay the govt.
Perhaps they will now mail all opt outers the addresses of all the others that have opt'd out. Something to look forward to. :eek5:

The NZTA seem to be struggling here.

They are releasing information for a wide range of reasons to a wide range of individuals and businesses.

However the releases made under the OIA don't seem to be considering the fact that when an individual has said DON'T release my information this has to be considered as a very good reason NOT to release the information.

And the law doesn't allow release of information for other than the purposes of law enforcement, maintenance of the security of New Zealand, collection of charges imposed or authorised by an enactment and the administration and development of transport law and policy.

While it may be very convenient for a wide range of people to have access to the register, the law doesn't seem to support the current implementation.

Bald Eagle

6th April 2012, 09:16

Email sent.

nosebleed

6th April 2012, 09:39

For those who were a little *ahem* late *ahem* in opting out...

linky; https://transact.nzta.govt.nz/transactions/PersonalInfoAccess/entry.aspx

davereid

10th April 2012, 11:30

For those who were a little *ahem* late *ahem* in opting out...
linky; https://transact.nzta.govt.nz/transactions/PersonalInfoAccess/entry.aspx

They have only declined about 9 of 36000 transactions on opted out people. If you don't want that dodgy towie, Freds sister at the insurance company or any other scumbag having access to your details after you have opted out, send that email as well.

Max Preload

10th April 2012, 23:48

The driver of the vehicles are responsible for toll and ticket fee's (and always has been) ... and registered owners are required to give information to the relevant authorities if asked (subject to a large fine if they don't) regardless who the LEGAL owner is. Nothing will change that.Irrelevant. The person who is sent the initial contact regarding stationery vehicle offences and unpaid road tolls is the registered owner, not the driver, because they don't know who the driver is. The registered owner can then either say "I wasn't driving, this other bozo was" or pay up or fight the accusation.

The person they might nominate as the driver can also deny the offence and say they weren't the person driving. It falls back on the registered owner. That's not necessarily the legal owner. Lease vehicles are registered in the name of the entity leasing it.

If NO relationship applies ... why is an owner/phyisical address required on applications for vehicle registration... ???It is solely for recording the details of the person responsible for the vehicle. It has no standing outside of that purpose.

James Deuce

11th April 2012, 19:14

"Stationery"? You leave my envelopes out of it please!

davereid

11th April 2012, 20:20

"Stationery"? You leave my envelopes out it please!

Use some stationery.

Write on it. I OPTED OUT. Dont sell my personal details.

And send it to the NZTA.

davereid

22nd April 2012, 10:15

However, 100% of the 4000 plus queries resulted in the opted out persons details being disclosed.

scracha

4th May 2012, 10:28

A
However, 100% of the 4000 plus queries resulted in the opted out persons details being disclosed.
Got my response today.

100% of the 6000 plus preconsidered applications were released for opted out persons.
>90% of the 500 plus MR31 applications were also release for opted out persons.

Doesn't seem much point in opting out now does there?

mashman

4th May 2012, 12:30

oneofsix

4th May 2012, 13:07

I got a response today too but I'll need to give it a little read later as I asked different questions. A question for the folks here though: When I received my expired rego notice, would an MR31 have to have been requested from the NZTA to get my personal and address details?

Are you really asking if they have to fill out a form to get the data from themselves which you gave them for contacting the registered person for that vehicle?

Of course they do and as its a advertising campaign it should be denied for hose that opt'd out. :corn:

mashman

4th May 2012, 13:49

Are you really asking if they have to fill out a form to get the data from themselves which you gave them for contacting the registered person for that vehicle?

Of course they do and as its a advertising campaign it should be denied for hose that opt'd out. :corn:

Granted I read it a while ago, but aren't the parking wardens employed by an overseas company, somewhere in Luxembourg? I'll have another read of the document sent to me today, but I was told that I was unable to opt out as my license and bike details were not logged against each other in their system. That has me wondering how they found my address detail in order to send me the infringement.

Also covered in the document is that once the CEO approves an "entity" that will make bulk requests, the requests will be sent out (without MR31 request (will validate that later)) irrespective of opt-out status. Which then has me wondering how my details are then used by the 3rd party and whether they are bound by the same rules as the NZTA, them being private and all. I'll have another read of the PDF later to verify the MR31 requirement for bulk requesters.

nzmikey

4th May 2012, 15:17

I Reg the bike to my parents & the bike lives at mine. & good luck to any prick trying to follow me home to find where I live, as I live in a no exit street with a walkway ( that the bike has been up before ) & down a long drive with a few houses at the end :D

Bald Eagle

4th May 2012, 16:12

Well got my OIA reply today . In summary In 1 year 545 standard requests received for opted out info and 505 had information released.

7457 "pre-considered" aplications where received for opted out peopel and all released.

so out of 8002 requests all but 40 had the information released.

Seems to me opting-out isn't.

FJRider

4th May 2012, 16:31

Has anybody asked NZTA how many requests for their information has been recieved ... how many given ... and from/to who ... ??????????????

winston

4th May 2012, 17:08

Has anybody asked NZTA how many requests for their information has been recieved ... how many given ... and from/to who ... ??????????????

yea my dad asjked and tornment parking have access to everyones address even if they are opt out they get all of them and they got dads. But not anymore now they get an empty sectin we changed it.

FJRider

4th May 2012, 17:35

yea my dad asjked and tornment parking have access to everyones address even if they are opt out they get all of them and they got dads. But not anymore now they get an empty sectin we changed it.

How very clever :doh:

And when they get no response (or money) fron you ... they pass it on to a debt collection angency. So when ... at a later time ... YOU apply for credit somewhere ... it will be DECLINED (I hate that word)

So a $10 parking ticket turns into a much bigger sum ... and lots of embarrasment for you.

Blank section addresses often gets the powers that be upset ... if a traffic offence ticket gets the "return to sender, address non-existant" ... You don't need to be stopped to be issued a ticket.

Falsification of your vehicle details are taken seriously by some goverment departments.

Zedder

4th May 2012, 17:39

Has anybody asked NZTA how many requests for their information has been recieved ... how many given ... and from/to who ... ??????????????

Good point.

FJRider

4th May 2012, 17:45

Good point.

I'm thinking ... under the "Public Information Act" ... :msn-wink: could be wrong ... often am

mashman

4th May 2012, 17:45

Has anybody asked NZTA how many requests for their information has been recieved ... how many given ... and from/to who ... ??????????????

Yes and there have been no MR31 requests on my details. However there may be a loophole? "The NZTA has in place a streamlined MR31 application process for parties who have been granted an authorisation and make a high number of applications but only for limited reasons.". That sounds to me like it's an online form with a drop down box of reasons that bypasses the need to have the request checked by anyone. The source is trusted.

I was not opted out either as neither the AA or NZTA could opt me out due to my license and vehicle details not having been "mapped". Hence my above question in regards to how my details would have been obtained for my infringement notice. I'm still curious as to the restrictions placed on the 3rd parties that receive my details too.

I guess I should just be like the rest of NZ and just accept it :eek:

davereid

4th May 2012, 18:53

That sounds to me like it's an online form with a drop down box of reasons that bypasses the need to have the request checked by anyone. :

I have been forwarded quite a few OIAs on the subject now, and I'm developing an understanding of it. Its a hot topic here, on an ACC forum and on a Privacy forum, so lots of information is now sneaking out.

winston

5th May 2012, 12:04

FJRider

5th May 2012, 13:00

yea well they shouldnt sell my address then eh its there faultnot mine they can get fuckd. they lie too cos dads answer and mine are different they told me tornment cant get my details they cant get oppt out but they alredy had so when asked again they sed yes they camn so you cant trust them.

So ... YOU are pissed off because a parking firm you thought (rather stupidly I might add) could NOT access YOUR vehicle details ... and parked there anyway. And (obviously) sent you a ticket.

My heart bleeds ... :killingme

If your vehicle gets a few non-delivered tickets ... you may get an arrest warrant taken out in your name. Which may mean you get stopped (not necessarily for a traffic offence ... just a regular licence plate check) and arrested right there and then. No warning.

Or ... they may just cancel your registration for that vehicle.

FJRider

5th May 2012, 13:08

Hence my above question in regards to how my details would have been obtained for my infringement notice. I'm still curious as to the restrictions placed on the 3rd parties that receive my details too.

I guess I should just be like the rest of NZ and just accept it :eek:

NZTA is not the only source of information for personal details Police have.

davereid

6th May 2012, 09:05

Blank section addresses often gets the powers that be upset ... if a traffic offence ticket gets the "return to sender, address non-existant" ... You don't need to be stopped to be issued a ticket. Falsification of your vehicle details are taken seriously by some goverment departments.

I have been surprised from responses on this thread, and other forums as to just how many people have a "special" address that they use for the NZTA. Many people seem to use an address that allows them to get mail, so they can meet their obligations for tolls, licensing and "real tickets" and ignore the rubbish, as well as have protection from the uninvited and unwanted arriving on their doorstep.

The Act clearly does allow for the release of a persons information for a court case or enforcement. So those with legitimate claims that would withstand scrutiny by the courts will always be able to get the information.

Enforcement of the opt-out is about stopping the balance of information release - the release of information that while it may have financial benefit to the applicant, would not be enforced by the courts.