Loss of Access to the NZCAA Aircraft Register

[Peter Lewis]

Internet access to the register and updates has been withdrawn.

Message from Dave Paull:
"I have just spoken to Julia at NZCAA registrations and she has confirmed that access has been denied due to privacy complaints etc.

She strongly recommends that we all individually contact the Co-ordinator Official Information at [e-mail]. and explain why we would like to retain access to this information.

I am working on my case now."

[merv]

No wonder I couldn’t access the site, I thought it was me with figure trouble. This is a terrible revelation. Where is all this PC tasking us? From time to time for various reasons most of us would want to look up to see who own which aircraft. To be consistent that would mean any change of registration in publications or cancelation would be withdrawn as well. This as far reaching consequences. We must all get behind this anomaly and get it reinstated forthwith.

[FlyingKiwi]

That's deeply frustrating! In the meantime you can use this website: www.regosearch.com/ but presumably they won't be able to update their database for New Zealand beyond the present date if the CAA database is no longer available for general viewing.

[Bruce]

Sorry to disagree with the opinions of the historians and enthusiasts, but I actually support the removal of the register from public domain. Since registering CKE I have received all manner of junk mail through the post addressed to me as "Aircraft owner". I think in todays world there is no place for publishing addresses in particular - it is too easy to abuse. (I also know that one company I worked for fraudulently obtained finance by using the register as "Proof" they owned an aeroplane when in fact they didnt (The register only records the operator or person entitled to operate the aircraft - not the legal owner)). I has also been abused in the past with people (including Airways Corp) charging for services allegedly supplied, when in point of law the services had not been requested, nor a contract entered into, but an invoice could be sent because the address was available. I think a compromise of initial and surname and perhaps town would be acceptable, but I object to my personal details being plastered on a public facing website without my approval.

[thomarse]

I'll be interested to see if any contributors to this forum come out in support of this move, as they did when the CAA restricted the amount of info available recently.

For me, this has destroyed a lifetime - and totally harmless - interest in the historical ownership of NZ-registered aircraft. What more central aspect of individual aircraft's histories can there be?

Goodbye to Register Reviews in magazines. I'm gutted.

[dakdriver]

The reason a fairly large group of us opposed the fact that our names and addresses were published with our tail numbers on the web was because it was a breach of our privacy. (A ruling by the Privacy Commissioner)
It also allowed others to use this information illegally to our detriment. (There will be more to follow on this)
If the same rules are applied as per the motor registrar then the information could be available to those that have a good reason to have access to it. But not all and sundry.
I am sorry it has come to this but it’s a sign of the times and with identity fraud as rife as it is on the internet, some protection is certainly warranted

[Dave Homewood]

If someone asks on the forum in future who owns ZK-xxx, if an answer is given will that breach the privacy act too? Where will it all end?

[Bruce]

I don't have any objection about publishing that ZK-CKE was owned by Bruce Cooke. Its public knowledge and I am happy for that to be known. My problem is the publishing of my home address, phone number and hell, even middle name! We have to be careful - its not just aeroplane information we are talking about here, it is PEOPLE information, which I would expect people to show some respect for.
The principle of the privacy act is that if information is provided, it is for a specific purpose, is appropriate for that purpose and used only by those with a legitimate use for that information.
When I registered my aircraft, the information was provided for the purposes of complying with the NZ Civil Aviation Rules, to determine if I was a fit and proper person to hold an aviation document, namely a certificate of registration. At no time was I asked to authorise release of that information to the general public. I may or may not have had any objection, but I was never asked. Its not just "political correctness" it is genuine personal information that I have a right to have some control over, and which can be exploited for personal gain in many ways by those less ethical people we find in todays society. whilst I sympathise with the rego collectors, your "hobby" is of less importance than the principle of protecting who we are.

[Peter Lewis]

Interesting that the details of any UK aircraft can be found at GINFO, not only for current aircraft but deregistered aircraft also.

You would think that the Brits would have more to fear from potential illegal or terrorist activity than we would here.

There is an increasing tendency in NZ to close down any potential contentious activity on the basis that it 'might' cause a problem. It then takes strenuous and possibly lawyer-involved action to get that activity reinstated.

During my times in Asia it struck me that there was a different point of view in their way of the world from what we are used to.
In most Asian cultures there is a tradition(for the common people at least) that everything was banned unless it was specifically permitted. Thus you could often not change your residence or your job unless you applied for permission to do so.
This is contrary to western/european culture where we ban a few things (murder, rape, assault etc.) but otherwise you are free to do whatever you wish.
I fear that we are now seeing the end of this tradition of relative freedom and getting into a situation similar to the Asian model.

Fortress CAA seems to be leading the charge.

[Peter Lewis]

Dec 3, 2012 22:48:38 GMT 12 Bruce said:

My problem is the publishing of my home address, phone number and hell, even middle name!

All of which (ok, apart from phone number) can be found printed in the Parliamentary Electoral Roll which can be browsed at will by anybody at all at your local Public Library.

[chinapilot]

Thought of G-INFO when I read this...however, it has to be kept in mind that just because it is there it doesn't mean that owners in the UK want all their details available and there is a strong resistance to it....watch for changes eventually there also.

Many places in Asia have strict privacy laws in operation especially HK.

[thomarse]

I guess it's time we started thinking about discontinuing telephone books then? And of course the Electoral Roll?

HRV pestered me yesterday because they got my number from the phone book.

[dakdriver]

This is the only place a tail number can be linked to an individual. As Bruce says he was never given the option of having his details published. The form that is completed states that the information is to be used on the aircraft register and used on the CAA website. It does not give you the option of opting out of having your details published and those of us who crossed that option out were ignored by CAA who went ahead and published the details
As an example: How about all the users of this forum putting up your full names, addresses and telephone numbers as well as your nom de plume for all to see and use. I would not agree to this nor would most of you. So you can see the reason why there is an objection to the CAA putting these details on the internet.
One of the reasons that influenced people to do something about the published list was an illegal activity using this freely available information.
The motor vehicle registry does Not publish names and addresses but information about the vehicle is freely available on the net. What is different about aircraft, and as for CAA, they continued to publish this information after the privacy commissioner found against them. It took further action to have the information removed

And Yes remove telephone books and electoral rolls when they start publishing other details about your personal life. Think of it …you want to commit a burglary, but want someone with a decent amount of money, how about the guy that owns a Rolls Royce? Or a Lamborghini, telephone book? Internet, motor registry ? Sorry not listed but what about someone with an aircraft. (Now we all know you have to be absolutely loaded to own an aircraft right?) Its so easy all the details were listed on the internet, you could take your pick.
And that’s one of the reasons this list had to go

[dakdriver]

Dave
If you ask who owns and the owner or some other person answers with “Bill Blogs from Timbuktu” I don’t think this breaks the privacy law. But releasing telephone numbers and addresses does.

[ErrolC]

Dec 4, 2012 5:30:40 GMT 12 thomarse said:

I guess it's time we started thinking about discontinuing telephone books then? And of course the Electoral Roll?

HRV pestered me yesterday because they got my number from the phone book.

A significant portion of the population PAY to NOT be in the phone book. Others choose to not have a home phone (often largely to avoid cold-calling).
You are required to give your details to CAA. It makes all the difference.
A reasonable compromise could probably be reached (and codified in a Code of Practice, approved by the Privacy Commissioner). If the CAA wasn't willing to discuss (was it?), you get this result.

[thomarse]

I'd have no problem with just the name of the owner; not even the town.

And I'd have no problem with listing my details on here as challenged - I have nothing to hide, and welcome contact with other members via whatever means.

[Dave Homewood]

Does this mean that all landing fee charge bills from all airports and dromes, to all pilots who make any landing, will now have to be forwarded through CAA as only they will have the billing address details? It seems if that's the case a lot of double handling and extra expense will be incurred, plus some might say it has a whiff of the Government keeping tabs on individual's movements.

[htbrst]

Indeed, you cant tell from the electoral role itself that Bruce was an aircraft owner to target with aviation related junk mail.

We had some work done to our house when we moved in ~5 years ago, nothing particularly major (remodelling to get an inside toilet) which required a building consent.

At the time, building consents along with our details were available to all and sundry - I think they have since changed the rules - but we were spammed with marketing from plumbing, electrical and building suppliers which was very frustrating particularly when they were mostly Auckland based which was no use to us at all.

Perhaps they could open it up to certified groups to publish limited information? E.g. NZ Aviation News, Pacific Wings and AHSNZ (etc) ?

[Brett]

The website states:
"Subject to the Privacy Act 1933, information from the registry may be available from the Coordinator Official Information at [e-mail]"

There is no such Act.

[ZacYates]

Typo: Privacy Act 1993, perhaps?

I am surprised at the intense debate this has caused.