Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


3721 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1209


Topic # 193614 17-Mar-2016 10:41
Send private message

I've been using the Auckland council and Tauranga council ratings database recently. 

 

The Tauranga council ratings database includes property owner names by default, eg, 

 

http://bit.ly/1S4NARS

 

The Auckland council ratings database does not include property owner names ...

 

http://bit.ly/1M8MAgg

 

But, the Auckland council website says...

 

"An owner whose information is included on the rating database may request that council withhold his or her name or postal address (or both) from the rating database (as per Section 28C of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002)."

 

So why does Auckland council provide the option to remove your name when there is no name to remove?

 

Tauranga council say....

 

"Your name and postal address is included in our Rating Information Database required by the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002."

 

And this is correct, the Act says....

 

The rating information database made available under subsection (2) must include, for each rating unit in the district, all the information that the local authority holds in its rating information database in relation to that rating unit, including—
(a)the name of the owner of the rating unit; and
(b)the postal address of the owner of the rating unit.

 

 

 

So, we have Tauranga council saying the name must be included by law, but , the auckland council do not seem to comply with the law? 

 

I was just curious as to how the same law is interpreted completely oppositely by two different councils.  To me, it seems Auckland council is not complying with the law. 

 

Any ideas? Just curious about this as I've been reading up on a few different laws of late and am getting more interested in stuff like this.   There are quite a few other inconsistencies between different councils with respect to the law, especially with the RMA.

 

 

 

[edit] the only thing i can think of, is that auckland council do not consider the online version of the database as the 'official' database.  But, still an inconsistency in interpretation.

 

 

 

 


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer Create new topic


3721 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1209


  Reply # 1514924 17-Mar-2016 10:51
Send private message

Is there a 'geekzone' for lawyers? Or, do they only like chargeable hours :)

 

Not a bad idea actually. Will get to it. . . 


1710 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 169

Trusted

  Reply # 1514925 17-Mar-2016 10:51
Send private message

The 'Rating information database' for Auckland will almost certainly contain that information. It will just he hidden from public view. I suspect very poor wording used by Auckland Council.

 

 

 

Tauranga just not hiding that information publicly.


1993 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 331

Trusted

  Reply # 1514930 17-Mar-2016 10:57
Send private message

Agree with Keewee01

 

Note that LINZ as the agency in charge of recording property parcels (and changes thereof) also has property owner names on file, which is public info (available to advanced users). This means that removing your name from the rating database doesn't make you anonymous as the owner of the property




3721 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1209


  Reply # 1514948 17-Mar-2016 11:50
Send private message

keewee01:

 

The 'Rating information database' for Auckland will almost certainly contain that information. It will just he hidden from public view. I suspect very poor wording used by Auckland Council.

 

Tauranga just not hiding that information publicly.

 

 

The fault in your logic is that you are saying the council are not required to provide the information publicly, but, the act seems to say it must be shown (not hidden).

 

The wording of the act says....

 

[i]28A Inspection of complete rating information database

 

(2)For the purpose of inspecting any information in relation to a particular rating unit, a copy of the local authority’s complete rating information database must be-
(a)available to any person-
(b)accessible to the person by the person-
(i)accessing the database by himself or herself or
(3)The rating information database made available under subsection (2) must include, for each rating unit in the district, all the information that the local authority holds in its rating information database in relation to that rating unit, including—
(a)the name of the owner of the rating unit[/i]

 

So, (2) says the ratings database must be available to any person (ie publicly).

 

Then, (3) says the information provided to the public (from 2) must include the name of the owner (3a).

 

 

 

ie, in other words, the name of the owner must be shown publicly , and not hidden.

 

What is the fault in my logic here?


1993 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 331

Trusted

  Reply # 1514952 17-Mar-2016 11:56
One person supports this post
Send private message

It might be accessible in a legal compliance way in hard copy or on dedicated computer at council service centers, and the web version is a supplementary form of access that isn't intended to meet act requirements




3721 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1209


  Reply # 1514965 17-Mar-2016 12:15
Send private message

nickb800:

 

It might be accessible in a legal compliance way in hard copy or on dedicated computer at council service centers, and the web version is a supplementary form of access that isn't intended to meet act requirements

 

 

 

 

I was wondering if that might be the case.

 

Either the online access is the official ratings database or it is not.   

 

If online access is the ratings database, then ACC should provide owner names. 

 

If the online access is not the ratings database then both ACC/TCC could be breaking privacy law. eg,  by providing private information about property owners outside of the ratings database. You could for example find out your neighbours rate bill via the online enquiry. 

 

Either way , it is a pretty big difference in the way each council interprets the law. 

 

 

 

 


1993 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 331

Trusted

  Reply # 1514966 17-Mar-2016 12:18
Send private message


3721 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1209


  Reply # 1514986 17-Mar-2016 13:04
One person supports this post
Send private message

nickb800:

 

This page seems to explain the difference pretty well 

 

http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/en/ratesbuildingproperty/ratesvaluations/ratespropertysearch/pages/aboutthisservice.aspx

 

 

 

 

 

 

It is helpful, thanks. 

 

Both councils allow full access by visiting physical council buildings. 

 

Only TCC allows the online name enquiries.   I don't think TCC should do this though.  It is not really required and they should be protecting ratepayer privacy where possible. 

 

 

 

 


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.