UK Man Prevented From Finding Chipped Pet Under Data Protection Act

Dave Moorhouse was elated when he was informed that a microchip provider had information on the whereabouts of his stolen dog. This joy soon faded when the company informed him that it could not divulge the Jack Russell terrier's location because it would breach the Data Protection Act. Last week a court agreed with the chip company and refused Mr Moorhouse's request for a court order compelling them to reveal the name and address of the new owners. Steven Wildridge, managing director of the chip company said: “This is not a choice, it’s an obligation under the Data Protection Act. If the individuals involved do not want us to pass on their details to the original owner then we cannot do so unless compelled to following a criminal or civil proceeding."

Comments

Re:So they can just keep stolen property then?

[Myopic]

To be fair, a lot of us on Slashdot are Americans and have American-style expectations of rights. Britain is not a free country, so we shouldn't try to make presumptions on British law based on American law. Apparently, in addition to not having the right to free speech (saying true things even when it damages the reputation of a corporation), and not having the right to self defense (peacefully carrying a weapon, or using a weapon when another person tries to harm you), British subjects also do not have property rights (the right to recapture goods stolen from you) or civil redress of grievances (the right to sue a person who is holding your stolen property for return of that property).

Hey, that's not a legal system that I would want to live under, but even if Britain is not a free country, it *IS* a functioning democracy (sort of), so it is the British subjects who choose this legal system for themselves, and I don't think we Americans should go too far in criticizing it.

Re:So they can just keep stolen property then?

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realize that those things you whine about US courts doing have a long precedent within common law history, no? The people whining about "activist judges" know shit about their country's judicial heritage.

Re:So they can just keep stolen property then?

[BitZtream]

Every shelter in existence has the rfid readers to know that a dog has been chipped, it costs them WAY less money to return it than to adopt it out, so it didn't go to the pound.

Microchips _move_ within the body, and it's not uncommon for some people to only check the neck and miss a chip which migrated down to the elbow.

I'm pretty sure you would have failed anatomy in vet school. The chips are put in behind the neck and there is no possible way for it to migrate to the elbow, it just doesn't work that way.

Second, on a dog that size, you could pretty much hold the scanner anywhere near the dog and wave it slightly and end up detecting the chip.

Please don't talk about animals like you have a clue, you sound like some retarded vet tech or vet tech assistant who doesn't have any idea what you're talking about.

Of course, this wouldn't have been a problem if he hadn't left the dog tied up unattended in his yard...

You're an idiot.