GPS Tracking – What’s the law


United Kingdom rules

The law in the united kingdom hasn’t specifically addressed the utilization of GPS Trackers, but several regulations may affect the utilization of the technology as a monitoring tool.

Data Protection Function 1998

It really is quite clear that if consumer instructions (written or digitally sent) that identify a person and a car are coupled with a tracker, the info compiled by the tracker becomes personal data as described by the info Protection Take action 1998. The report “What’s personal data? – An instant reference guide”[18] shared by the info Commissioner’s Office (ICO) makes clear that data discovering a living specific is personal data. If a full time income specific can be determined from the info, with or without more information that could become available, is personal data.


A person is determined if recognized from other associates of an organization. Generally a person’s name as well as various other information will be sufficient to recognize them; but an individual can be determined even if their name is as yet not known. Start by considering the means open to identify a person and the degree to which such means are plentiful to you.

Does the info ‘associate to’ the identifiable living specific, whether in personal or family life, business or career?

Relates to’ means: Data which recognizes a person, even lacking any associated name, may be personal data which is refined to learn or track record something about this specific, or the handling of information that influences the average person. Therefore, data may ‘associate to’ a person in several various ways.

May be the data ‘clearly about’ a specific individual?

Data ‘clearly about’ a person includes his health background, criminal history, record of his work, or his successes in a sporting activity. Data that’s not ‘clearly about’ a specific individual can include information about his activities. Data such as personal lender assertions or itemized phone charges will be personal data about the average person operating the profile or contracting for phone services. Where data is not ‘definitely about’ an identifiable person it could be beneficial to consider if the data has been prepared, or could easily be prepared, to learn, record or determine something about an identifiable specific. Information may be personal data where in fact the goal, or an incidental result, of the handling, is the fact that you learn or track record something about an identifiable person, or the handling could impact an identifiable person. Data from a Tracker is always to identify the average person or his activities. Hence, it is personal data within this is of the info Protection Action 1998.

Anybody who wishes to assemble personal data must be authorized with the info Commissioner’s Office (ICO) and also have a DPA quantity. It really is a legal offence to process data rather than have a DPA amount.[19]


It might be a civil trespass to deploy a tracker onto an automobile not owned by your client or even to yourself. However in the OSC’s twelve-monthly inspection, the OSC’s Main Monitoring Commissioner Sir Christopher Rose explained “putting an arm into a steering wheel arch or under the body of a car is straining the idea of trespass”.[20]

However, getting into private land of anyone to be able to deploy a tracker is evidently a trespass which really is a civil tort.

Protection of Harassment Action 1997

At times, the general public misinterprets surveillance, in every its varieties, as stalking. Whilst there is absolutely no strict legal meaning of ‘stalking’, neither will there be specific legislation to handle this behaviour. Alternatively, this is a term used to spell it out a specific kind of harassment. Generally, it is employed to spell it out a long-term design of persistent and repeated connection with, or attempts to get hold of, a particular sufferer.

The Coverage of Freedoms Action 2012 created two new offences of stalking by placing new areas 2A and 4A in to the PHA 1997.[21] The brand new offences which arrived to pressure on 25 November 2012, aren’t retrospective. Section 2A (3) of the PHA 1997 collections out types of serves or omissions which, specifically circumstances, are ones associated with stalking. Illustrations are: carrying out a person, enjoying or spying in it, or forcing connection with the sufferer through any means, including cultural media.

Such behavior curtails a victim’s flexibility, leaving them sense that they constantly need to be careful. Oftentimes, the carry out might seem innocent (if considered in isolation), however when carried out consistently, to be able to total a span of conduct, it could then cause significant security alarm, harassment or stress to the sufferer.

It ought to be known that the illustrations given in section 2A (3) is no exhaustive list but a sign of the types of behavior which may be shown in a stalking offence.

Stalking and harassment of another or others range from a variety of offences such as those under: the Cover from Harassment Action 1997; the Offences Against the individual Take action 1861; the Sexual Offences Action 2003; and the Malicious Marketing communications Act 1988.

Types of the types of do often associated with stalking include: immediate communication; physical following; indirect contact through friends, acquaintances, family or technology; or, other intrusions in to the victim’s level of privacy. The patterns curtails a victim’s liberty, leaving them sensing that they constantly need to be careful.

If the main topic of inquiry knows the monitoring, then this might total harassment under preventing Harassment Action 1997. There’s a circumstance at the Royal Courts of Justice in which a private investigator has been sued under this work for the utilization of trackers. In Dec 2011, a Promise was helped bring against Richmond Day & Wilson Small (First Accused) and Bernard Matthews Small (Second Accused), Britain’s leading Turkey Professional.

The case pertains to the discovery of any tracking device within August 2011 on a car supposedly linked to Hillside Pet Sanctuary.[22]

Legislation of Investigatory Power Act 2000

Property Disturbance: THE HOUSE Office shared a file entitled “Covert Security and Property Disturbance, Modified Code of Practice, Pursuant to section 71 of the Rules of Investigatory Forces Action 2000” [23] where it advises in Section 7, web page 61 that;

Basic basis for lawful activity