Ms Margery Slater

By e-mail to

[FOI #24215 email]

David A. Smith

Head of Knowledge Management Division

Area 2/A4

Eland House

Bressenden Place

London SW1E 5DU

e-Mail:

[email address]

Web Site: www.communities.gov.uk

5 May 2010

Dear Margery Slater

FoI Request - Technical background to updated version of the water calculator used within the Code for Sustainable Homes

Thank you for your email of 5 April requesting an internal review into the handling of your request for information posted via the “Whatdotheyknow” website on 3 December 2009. I have been appointed as the internal review officer for your case. I am independent of the business area that handled your request.

The Freedom of Information Act 2000

The Freedom of Information Act 2000 stipulates (section 1(1)) that, subject to the application of exemptions in Part II of the Act, “any person making a request for information to a public authority is entitled to be informed… whether it holds information the description specified in the request, and… if that is the case, to have that information communicated to him (her)”. Section 10(1) further specifies that subject to certain exceptions, “a public authority must comply with section 1(1) promptly and in any event not later than the twentieth working day following receipt of the request”.

I apologise that Communities and Local Government has not kept to its usual high standards in responding to your particular request, which has clearly taken far longer than 20 working days for you to receive a response. There were a number of factors behind the delay, including the fact that the FoI request arrived at a very busy period when a consultation package was being prepared and the staff involved were under considerable pressure and working long hours to get it out prior to the Christmas holidays. Only one person in the team was sufficiently acquainted with the technical review of the Water Calculator to respond properly to your request, and that person was unavoidably absent for some time following the Christmas break.

The respondent was under the impression that she had replied to the request on 26 February - admittedly already over a month late - but the e-mail giving the reply and the relevant background documents was initiated from a remote access laptop and was apparently not sent successfully. We were unaware of this until you posted your request for an internal review of our handling of your original request.

I note that since you sent your request for an internal review of your original request on 6 April, you have now received the response to your request providing information of the description you were seeking, which, as I noted above, we thought we had sent out on 26 February. I hope that you feel satisfied with the response you have received.

As reviewing officer, I should finally make one or two comments concerning both the acknowledgement letter sent out on 13 January and the response of 6 April accompanying the documents you requested. Nowhere in either document was it acknowledged that your request was being handled in accordance with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (or, alternatively the Environmental Information Regulations 2004). Further, neither the acknowledgement letter nor the final response letter informed you of your right to request an internal review if you were dissatisfied with the handling of your request or your further right to approach the Information Commissioner for a re-assessment of your case if you remained dissatisfied following the internal review.

I shall bring these points to the attention of the official who replied to your request.

Once again, I apologise that you had to wait so long for the response to your request.

Yours sincerely

David Smith

Deputy Director

Knowledge Management Division