Resources

Dear J Smith

Re: Request for Internal Review - Request 4376

Thank you for your emails dated 16^th October and 25^th November 2009 regarding the response to your recent request to the Council (our ref: 4376).

In your emails you asked for an internal review of the handling of your Request. I have summarised the details of your appeal below:

That the Council did not sufficiently answer your query as it:

I am sorry that you are dissatisfied with our handling of your requests and I have investigated your complaints under Stage 1 of the Council's Corporate Complaints Procedure. Further details of our procedure can be found on our website: http://www.westminster.gov.uk/services/councilgovernmentanddemocracy/councils/contactsconsultationandfeedback/complaints-and-compliments/complaints/

Response

The Council received your original request on the 17^th September 2009. You sent a further email on the 15^th October 2009, the target completion date, as you had not yet received a response. The Council sent you a response to your request on the 16^th October 2009. You sent an email on the same day to express dissatisfaction with the response. You followed this up with an email on the 25^th November as you had not received a reply to your email of the 16^th October.

Firstly, please accept my apologies for the lack of response to your email on the 16^th October 2009. This was due to a member of staff being on sick leave which meant that your email was, unfortunately, overlooked.

In responding to your request for an internal review I will refer to the following provision of the Freedom of Information Act 2000:

Date for implementation of security devices

In your email of the 16^th October you state that you did not receive an answer to your request of: "Can the Council please give a date when they will be fitting ground anchors or any other type of security which allows a motorcycle to be made immovable, for all the ON-STREET parking spaces in the borough of Westminster?"

I note that while the Council did not directly address this question in their response, the information provided in the Cabinet Member Report via the link offered the following:

In September 2009, 200 new devices have been purchased and a programme of implementation is being developed. We will be looking to install further devices where there is demand for them and where it is practicable and appropriate for us to do so.

In providing this information the Council met the legal obligation of section 1 (4) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 in that it communicated the information held at the time of the request. For the sake of clarity, I can confirm that at present the Council does not hold any other information as to the definite date by which all on-street motorcycle bays will be fitted with security devices, but that a programme of implementation is being developed in accordance with demand and practicality.

This aspect of your complaint is, therefore, not upheld.

Types of security devices

You requested to be told what types of security devices may be installed, and felt that this question had not been answered in the Council's response.

The following information was available in the same Cabinet Member Report referenced above:

Thus far the City Council has trialled Sheffield Stands in nine sites: at Oxendon Street, Carey Street, Drury Lane, Chandos Place, Upper St. Martin's Lane, Milford Lane, Wardour Street, Suffolk Place and Moscow Road. We have also installed a number of ground anchors across nine locations in Bayswater and Queens Park: at Second Avenue, Third Avenue, Sixth Avenue, Lancaster Gate, Enbrook Street (x2), Alexander Street, Cleveland Gardens and Hereford Road.

The Council, thereby, communicated the types of security devices are currently being trialled, with a view to installing further devices in accordance with demand. I am satisfied that this communicates the information that is held by the Council at the time of the request, as required by section 1 (4) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. For clarification, the Council does not hold any further information at this time in relation to whether any other security devices may be implemented.

This aspect of your complaint is, therefore, not upheld.

Consultation

In your original request you asked for the following information: "Who has been consulted to determine the type of security device selected"

The Council did not provide any information in their response with regard to who had been consulted with regard to security devices. This aspect of your complaint is, therefore, upheld.

I can inform you that with regard to consultation motorcyclists were encouraged to suggest what type of security device they may want & where they may want them installed. This public consultation is still ongoing as feedback can be submitted via the Westminster website. I provide a link here for your convenience:

This completes the internal review into the handling of your Request under the Council's complaints procedure. Should you be dissatisfied with our response, you are entitled to contact the Information Commissioner under Section 50 of the Freedom of Information Act. For your reference, I have provided his contact details below:

Information Commissioner's Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

Tel: 08456 30 60 60 or 01625 54 57 45
Fax: 01625 524510

Web: www.ico.gov.uk

I hope this fulfils your request. Should you have any queries, please contact me at the address above.

Yours sincerely,

4

2

1

Under the Data Protection Act 1998, Data Subjects have rights to challenge, alter or erase the inaccurate and unlawful processing of their information. In the first instance please contact The Data Protection Officer, Information Services, 101 Orchardson Street, London NW8 8EA. If you are not satisfied with our response you may contact The Information Commissioner: Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF