My Ref:
IGO/11-8835 & 9307
Your Ref:
Contact:
S Pearson
Email:
xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Information Governance
Resources
1st Floor
Loxley House
Station Street
Nottingham
Mr. A. Platt
NG2 3NG
Tel: 0115 876 3855
Sent by email to:
Email:
information.governance@nottin
ghamcity.gov.uk
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
www.nottinghamcity.gov.uk
23rd September 2011
Dear Mr. Platt
Re: Your request for information
Thank you for your email dated 24th May 2011. Please accept my sincere apologies
for the delay in responding to your request.
We have conducted an internal review of our handling of your case and accept that
we are outside the statutory deadline within which we should have responded and are
therefore in breach of our obligations under section 10(3) of the Freedom of
Information Act, 2000 (the FoIA). I therefore uphold your complaint and apologise
both for the delay and any inconvenience this has caused in respect of our timescales
for reply. Please be assured that we take our obligations under the FoIA very
seriously and are always striving to improve our performance.
As the information you requested is not personal or environmental it has been
processed in accordance with the FoIA.
You originally requested the following:
“Please will you provide me with a copy of any internal reports produced into
the alleged housing allocations irregularities as described in the District Auditor's
public interest report. Please include in this reports prepared by the much publicised
recent internal investigation said to have cost £100k. Please will you also provide any
minutes of meetings or reports/documents between the City Council and Notts Police
where the responsibility of investigating this matter was discussed”.
Please find attached all information disclosed in relation to similar requests on this
topic which meet some of your requirements above. Please see the attached
documents entitled,
“11-9187 Emails re GOC attending 29th July meeting.pdf”
“11-9187 Emails regarding meeting minutes – redacted.pdf”
“11-9187 Email to Julia Hodson_redacted.pdf”
For information we have also attached a copy of the publicly available document
detailing the reasoning behind Nottingham City Council’s decision to bring the
investigation into the allocation of council houses to a close. This document is entitled
“PIR report.pdf”
This document would be exempt from disclosure under section 21 of the Act as it is
already publicly available at our website:
http://open.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/comm/agenda.asp?CtteMeetID=3721
In addition I can confirm the following list of dates during 2006 and 2010, when
representatives of Nottingham City Council (NCC) met with representatives of
Nottinghamshire Police to discuss findings (including interim findings) of
investigations carried out by the police and/or by the District Auditor in relation to the
misallocation of council houses in the city between 2003 and 2005.
Date
15 May 2006
11 July 2006
17 August 2006
29 July 2010
15th May 2006 - Tim Render, Simon Parsons, Shail Shah, 4 police officers (Supt, DI
and 2 x sergeants) and Chris Leeland from the Audit Commission met at police
offices in Epperstone.
11th July 2006 – Colleagues from our Internal Audit team (Jane Buck / John
Slater/Simon Parsons) met with a police sergeant to discuss some of the detail at the
Guildhall.
17th August 2006 – Internal Audit (Simon Parsons/Jane Buck/John Slater) met at the
Guildhall with the team from the police who were to undertake the investigation.
29th July 2010 - Glen O’Connell met the team from the Police to discuss the outcome
of the Police work.
We have located some short notes regarding the above meetings and further more
detailed notes regarding the meetings of the 15th May 2006 and 29th July 2010. This
information is exempt from release under section 30(1)(a) of the Act as it is
information that has been held by this Authority for the purposes of an investigation
which this Authority had a duty to conduct with a view to it being ascertained whether
a person should be charged with an offence.
As we have relied on section 30(1)(a) of this Act to exempt information we are also
required to carry out a Public Interest Test as defined in section 2 of this Act. This is
a test of whether the public interest in withholding the information is greater than in
releasing it. In this case we feel it is in the best interests of the public that future
investigations both internal and external to the Authority are not compromised by the
release of this information and that the reputation and standing of a subject/s of an
investigation who has not been convicted of any offence is not unfairly damaged by
this authority releasing information. In addition we feel that release of the information
will not add anything of any note to the ongoing public debate on these issues other
than the identity of the subject or subjects of the investigation. For these reasons we
feel it is appropriate in this case to maintain the exemption and withhold the
information.
Further in an effort to advise and assist and in accordance with our obligations under
section 16, I can also make you aware of the following information which has also
already been disclosed in relation to another similar request;
There is no correspondence emailed or written between Councillor Jon Collins and
representatives of Nottinghamshire Police between October 2009 and December 1st
2010 in relation to the housing allocation issue. In accordance with section 1 of this
act this information cannot be provided as it is not held by this authority.
For information, I can confirm that a meeting was requested with Councillor Collins
however Nottinghamshire Police did not indicate the purpose of the meeting. Once it
was established that the meeting related to housing allocations it was passed to Glen
O’Connell to progress and Councillor Collins had no further involvement with
Nottinghamshire Police over the issue.
There is no correspondence emailed or written between Glen O’Connell and
representatives of Nottinghamshire Police between October 2009 and December 1st
2010 other than that referred to above. In accordance with section 1 of this act this
information cannot be provided as it is not held by this authority.
There is no correspondence emailed or written between Toni Price and
representatives of Nottinghamshire Police between October 2009 and December 1st
2010. In accordance with section 1 of this act this information cannot be provided as it
is not held by this authority.
There is no correspondence emailed or written between Carole Mills-Evans and
representatives of Nottinghamshire Police between October 2009 and December 1st
2010. In accordance with section 1 of this act this information cannot be provided as it
is not held by this authority.
There is no correspondence emailed or written between Stephen Barker and
representatives of Nottinghamshire Police between October 2009 and December 1st
2010. In accordance with section 1 of this act this information cannot be provided as it
is not held by this authority.
There is no correspondence emailed or written between Stephan Richeux or Keri
Underwood and representatives of Nottinghamshire Police between October 2009
and December 1st 2010. In accordance with section 1 of this act this information
cannot be provided as it is not held by this authority.
There is no correspondence emailed or written between Councillor Jon Collins and
representatives of Nottinghamshire Police between October 1st 2005 and December
1st 2006. In accordance with section 1 of this act this information cannot be provided
as it is not held by this authority.
There is no correspondence emailed or written between Toni Price and
representatives of Nottinghamshire Police between October 1st 2005 and December
1st 2006. In accordance with section 1 of this act this information cannot be provided
as it is not held by this authority.
There is no correspondence emailed or written between Adrienne Roberts and
representatives of Nottinghamshire Police between October 2009 and December 1st
2010. In accordance with section 1 of this act this information cannot be provided as it
is not held by this authority.
There is no correspondence emailed or written between Glen O’Connell and
representatives of Nottinghamshire Police between October 1st 2005 and December
1st 2006. In accordance with section 1 of this act this information cannot be provided
as it is not held by this authority.
There is no correspondence emailed or written between Councillor David Trimble and
representatives of Nottinghamshire Police between October 1st 2005 and December
1st 2006. In accordance with section 1 of this act this information cannot be provided
as it is not held by this authority.
There is no correspondence emailed or written between Adrienne Roberts and
representatives of Nottinghamshire Police between October 1st 2005 and December
1st 2006. In accordance with section 1 of this act this information cannot be provided
as it is not held by this authority.
Finally in relation to your request for a copy of all internal reports produced on this
matter, I can initially confirm that the matter is no longer being investigated by
Nottingham City Council (NCC) or the Audit Commission.
I have thoroughly investigated your request and can confirm that the Authority has
estimated that the cost of compliance with your enquiry, specifically, the cost to
accurately determine, retrieve, compile and collate the information required to provide
a full response to your enquiries, would exceed the appropriate limit of £450. In
accordance with the regulations this cost equates to 18.5 hours of work for one
person and it is estimated that it could take up to 7½ days of work for one person to
gather the necessary information. For the purposes of the above exercise, ‘report’ has
included formal reports and briefing notes.
In light of the above and in accordance with Section 12 of this Act the Authority has
decided on this occasion to exempt itself from complying with your request as the cost
incurred in providing a response to your enquiry would exceed the appropriate limit.
In addition to the section 12 cost exemption, detailed above, this Authority also
maintains that all of the above information identified but nor provided is exempt from
release under sections 30, 31, 36 and 42.
More specifically, we have determined that section 30 applies for the reasons outlined
above. Section 31 applies as disclosure may prejudice certain functions of this
Authority and the Police, in particular activities under section 31(1)(a) ‘the prevention
or detection of crime, (b) ‘the apprehension or prosecution of offenders’ and (h) ‘any
civil proceedings which are brought by or on behalf of a public authority and arise out
of an investigation conducted, for any of the purposes specified in subsection (2)’. As
far as we are aware, Nottinghamshire Police / and the Independent Police Complaints
Commission (IPCC) are still looking into the much publicised complaint regarding the
approach taken by police officers after receiving the referral by NCC many months
ago. The outcome from this review would dictate the level of any further police
involvement in this matter. The release of internal reports at this point may inhibit any
possible future police investigations.
As we have relied on section 31(1)(a), (b) and (h) of this act to exempt information we
are also required to carry out a Public Interest Test as defined in section 2 of this act.
This is a test of whether the public interest
in withholding the information is greater
than in releasing it. In this case we feel it is in the best interests of the public that
potential future investigations of this nature are not prejudiced through release of this
information, that individuals are not subjected to unwarranted or undeserved public
scrutiny where no offence or misconduct has been proven to have occurred and that
the decision making process of the police with regards to progressing investigations is
not made available to persons that may make use of that information for nefarious
purposes. For this reason we feel it is appropriate in this case to maintain the
exemption and withhold the information
With regards section 36, the Authority believes that your request relates to information
which, in the reasonable opinion of the qualified person, is exempt from disclosure as,
as in accordance with section 36(2)(b)(i) to release it ‘would, or would be likely to,
inhibit the free and frank provision of advice’, or (ii) ‘the free and frank exchange of
views for the purposes of deliberation’, and/or (c) ‘would otherwise prejudice, or would
be likely otherwise to prejudice, the effective conduct of public affairs’.
In applying the section 36 exemption the Monitoring Officer has given his reasoning
as being; that the release of the notes of meetings and other communications
between NCC and the police on this matter would make public the approach taken by
Nottinghamshire Police as it seeks to consider potential criminal activity. Such a
release would be inappropriate as it would effectively make the public aware of how
police officers conduct their business and such information could provide an
advantage to any criminals/would be criminals.
Further some of the reports would also be exempt on the basis that they constitute or
are comprised of legal advice. This information is exempt from disclosure under
section 42 of this act as we feel releasing the information would breach legal
professional privilege. This means we are withholding the information to protect the
relationship between a client (this authority) and a legal professional.
Owing to the fact that this authority is applying an exemption to part of the information
requested, please accept this letter as a refusal notice issued in accordance with
section 17 of this Act.
You are free to use any information supplied for your own use, including for non
commercial research purposes. However, any other type of re-use, for example, by
publishing the information or issuing copies to the public will require the permission of
the copyright owner. Where the copyright is owned by Nottingham City Council details
of the conditions on re-use can be obtained by contacting this office.
If you should have any questions please contact me on the above number quoting
your personal case reference which is
IGO/11-8835.
As you have already contacted the Information Commissioners Office about this
matter a copy of this letter has been sent to them for their information. If you remain
dissatisfied after receiving this response please write to them directly at Information
Commissioner's Office at
FOI/EIR Complaints Resolution, Information
Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9
5AF. You may also contact the Information Commissioner's Office by telephone on
01625 545745 or by email at xxxx@xxx.xxx.xxx.xx.
Yours sincerely
Mrs S Pearson
Information Governance
Resources