Tuesday, 23 November 2010

LDL recordings and following up questions

I was at Overview and Scutiny last night where there was an interesting report about LDL.  It covered some of the operational issues like nunbers of calls, increases in answering rates etc.  It also touched on calls being recorded (something I am part way through researching).

So I took the opportunity to ask a few questions ( an earlier blog on this explains that I have come across the issue of recorded calls and judgements being made about tone of voice through doing a piece of casework for a constituent). 

I was told that calls are kept for 3 months (not the full 12 months) as there isn't capacity to keep them for longer.

I was also told that the City Council can ask for information about calls but that the information would be provided as a transcript of the call not the actual recording.  I asked about how this was controlled.  I am still not sure exactly who in the City Council would have the authority to do this but hopefully that is checkable. I also asked if a member of the public whose call had been recorded would have similar rights.  The answer to this is yes by using the Data Protection rules (a subject access request) .  Obviously though,  if something is being queried by the Council (say an account of an incident is in dispute) the problem would be that the citizen would not necessarily know this and so would not know to make a request.

Personally I always deal with LDL by e mail but I wonder if there is anyone out there that would want to try doing a Subject Access Request for transcripts of their calls to see if this would work.

UPDATE: The report on LDL will also be going to the LDL scutiny panel which I understand meets next week (details should be at http://www.liverpool.gov.uk/ in the meetings and agendas section)

No comments: