Freedom of Information, Information Compliance Unit, Kent Police Headquarters, Sutton Road,
Maidstone, Kent ME15 9BZ Phone: 01622 654413
Fax: 01622 654437 - e-mail: [Kent Police request email]
Ms. Alison Green
Date:
9th September 2009
[FOI #9691 email]
Tel No.: (DDI)
01622 654413
FOI Ref.:
2396-2009
Dear Ms. Green,
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST 2396-2009
I write in connection with your request for information received by Kent Police on 24th March
2009. I am very conscious that this response finds you some time after the statutory time limit
permitted to a public authority for dealing with requests has passed and for the lateness of this
response I apologise.
I note that in your request you sought access to information concerning the Dangerous Dogs
Act 1991. I note further that you contacted Kent Police again on 6th May 2009 to enquire as to
why you had not yet received a response to your request and stating that you wished to
engage the complaints or appeals process.
I am now in a position to respond to your request, and to review the handling of your request
in accordance with Section 45 Code of Practice, which determines in detail how authorities
should deal with requests made under the Freedom of Information Act and the Environmental
Information Regulations. I will deal initially with the handling of your request and
communications with you, and the cause of our delays in responding to you, before moving on
to providing the information you have requested.
Although we responded to your request with an acknowledgement message on the 26th March
2009, you were due a response by 23rd April, or a letter explaining why we might be unable to
provide the information. As you had still not received a response, you rightly contacted us again
on the 6th May to complain.
It is indisputable that we have not communicated sufficiently with you, despite your reminders,
and for this I can only apologise and offer the following by way of explanation.
This unit has recently been experiencing some staffing difficulties and this, coupled with a
substantial increase in the workload associated with requests, has resulted in a process
backlog.
However, these problems were not entirely a problem of understaffing and resources. During
2007 and most of 2008, the unit was staffed by a relatively experienced team who were able to
cope with the workload at that time and who, for different reasons, all moved on from the unit
within a twelve-month period. Since then, we have had considerable difficulties surrounding
recruiting and finalising staff into posts within the unit. Unfortunately, this can take some time,
and it must be acknowledged that there are few if any candidates in the job market who can be
found with prior knowledge of information law. Having sourced candidates with the right
potential, it is then necessary to train them while in the role and this of course, requires further
expenditure of time and resources.
Kent Police : Central Operations FOI
Policy No. D18
Form No.3540_11 rev Feb 2005 [erev 02/5] v1.5
The Freedom of Information Act has only been in force since 2005 and is now becoming a
mature piece of legislation, with a substantial body of case law to inform decisions. The
numbers of requests received by Forces nationally have seen a steady increase. However, we
know from liaison with colleagues in other forces that the experience of staff working in this
area around the country is that the quality of the requests we receive and the quantity of work
that must be taken in responding to such requests has increased significantly during recent
years.
Certainly it is the case in Kent Police that, as the Force has become more aware and more
committed to the purposes of openness and accountability which underlie the legislation, we
are increasingly careful to ensure that the information we release is as complete and as
accurate as possible. This too is a phenomenon that is common to the police service and it is
some reassurance to us that although we do receive complaints about the time taken in dealing
with requests, we have also received compliments about the quality of the final outcome and I
hope that this will prove to be the case with this response.
The Freedom of Information team currently receive an average of around 62 requests per
month. We have already identified that the new team is capable of processing more than 62
requests during a month and so we are confident that we are now sufficiently resourced to deal
with incoming business.
I must acknowledge that, even with the increased resources outlined above, it will still take
some months until we are closer to the position that we would both prefer to see. However,
from reviewing the handling of your request I can now see that the outstanding backlog, and
the complaints such as your own that naturally arise from such a situation, has clearly had an
impact on our communications with applicants and this we are also seeking to improve in the
immediate term as we work towards a position of greater compliance.
Once again I apologise for any inconvenience caused to you by the delay in our responding to
your request. I hope that this part of my response serves to explain why this situation has
occurred and reassures you of our commitment to our responsibilities under the Act.
Turning now to the matter of your request, I am now in a position to provide you with
information as follows:
Question 1. What number of dogs have been seized by your police force; between 31/09/08
and 31/02/09 under section 1 of Dangerous Dogs Act; 1991?
Answer: Kent Police records show that there have been no dogs seized by Kent Police between
31/09/08 and 31/02/09 under section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.
Question 2. What number of dogs have been seized by your police force; between 31/09/08
and 31/02/09 under section 3 of Dangerous Dogs Act; 1991?
Answer: Kent Police records show that between 31/09/08 and 31/02/09 there were two dogs
seized by Kent Police under Section 3 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.
Question 3. What number of dogs has been seized by your police force between 31/09/08 and
31/02/09 as being used in a crime?
Answer: It would be theoretically possible for us to extract this data from our systems.
However, this would require the manual examination of all crime records for this time period,
which would involve an expenditure of resources that would far exceed the amount that a
public authority is required to invest in responding to a request, i.e. the cost of locating and
retrieving the information exceeds the āappropriate levelā (currently eighteen hours) as stated
in the Freedom of Information (Fees and Appropriate Limit) Regulations 2004.
Kent Police : Central Operations FOI
Form No.3540_11 rev Jan 2005 [erev 1/05] v1.1
Policy No. D18
The information is therefore exempt under Section 12(1) of the Freedom of Information Act and
in accordance with section 17(1) of the Act this letter must act as a Refusal Notice for this part
of your request.
(1) Section 1(1) does not oblige a public authority to comply with a request for information if
the authority estimates that the cost of complying with the request would exceed the
appropriate limit.
FOIA, Section 12 - Exemption where cost of compliance exceeds appropriate limit
Question 4. How many dogs held by your police force have died or been; destroyed as a result
of unknown cause, illness or behavioural issues while in your care (if known please give details)
between; 31/09/08 and 31/02/09?
Answer: This information is not held by Kent Police. Kent Police Dog Section does not seize
stray or dangerous dogs simply because of the risk of infection to our own dogs. Dog handlers
are occasionally asked to assist BCU officers in the capture or control of a dangerous dog, but
it is the sole responsibility of the BCU to seize and arrange for any kennelling. Our kennels are
never used for anything other than police dogs for the same reasons.
In relation to the previous question of the two dogs seized by Kent Police, records show that
one of these dogs was destroyed following receipt of a court destruction order.
Question 5. What is the total cost covered by your police force, for; kennelling, vet treatment,
legal bills and any other associated; costs for holding seized dogs under the DDA between
31/09/08 and; 31/02/09? Answer: There have been no costs incurred by Kent Police between 31/09/08 and 31/02/09 for
holding seized dogs under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.
Thank you for your interest in Kent Police and I hope that the information I have been able to
provide is of use to you. A sheet, which summarised your rights, was enclosed with the
acknowledgement sent to you and as suggested therein, should you have any further questions
concerning your request, please contact me quoting the reference number shown above.
Yours sincerely,
Superintendent Paul Gladstone
Freedom of Information Administrator
Kent Police : Central Operations FOI
Form No.3540_11 rev Jan 2005 [erev 1/05] v1.1
Policy No. D18
Your right to complain
We take our responsibilities under the Freedom of Information Act seriously but, if you feel your
request has not been properly handled or you are otherwise dissatisfied with the outcome of your
request, you have the right to complain. We will conduct an internal review to investigate the
matter and endeavor to reply within 20 working days. If your appeal concerns the decision to
apply an exemption, it would assist the review if you would outline why you believe the
exemption does not apply.
You may lodge your complaint by writing to:
Supt. Paul Gladstone
Head of the Information Compliance Unit
Professional Standards Department
Kent Police Headquarters
Sutton Road,
Maidstone,
Kent
ME15 9BZ
Or by e-mailing
[Kent Police request email]
If you are still dissatisfied following our internal review, you have the right under section 50 of
the Act to complain directly to the Information Commissioner. Before considering your
complaint, the Information Commissioner would normally expect you to have exhausted the
complaints procedures provided by Kent Police.
The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:
FOI Compliance Team (complaints)
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire SK9 5AF
Kent Police : Central Operations FOI
Form No.3540_11 rev Jan 2005 [erev 1/05] v1.1
Policy No. D18
Kent Police : Central Operations FOI
Form No.3540_11 rev Jan 2005 [erev 1/05] v1.1
Policy No. D18
