Follow this request
There are 2 people following this request
Act on what you've learnt
Similar requests
EXPENSES CLAIMED BY LGO JERRY WHITE
To Local Government Ombudsmen by mark price 15 October 2009
"Other travel" LGO White
To Local Government Ombudsmen by mark price 26 January 2010
Expenses discrepancy of £31,223 in ONE YEAR
To Local Government Ombudsmen by angela mayall 13 March 2010
Expenses claimed by LGO Tony Redmond
To Local Government Ombudsmen by mark price 27 December 2009
Expenses claimed by LGO Jerry White
To Local Government Ombudsmen by chris taylor 24 December 2009
Expenses claimed by LGO Jerry White
To Local Government Ombudsmen by chris taylor 24 December 2009
Flights J White
To Local Government Ombudsmen by mark price 11 April 2010
Tony Redmond's "other" travel
To Local Government Ombudsmen by mark price 5 February 2010
Expenses claimed by LGOs Redmond and White
To Local Government Ombudsmen by chris taylor 8 January 2010
Air Fares Tony Redmond
To Local Government Ombudsmen by mark price 11 March 2010
Expenses LGO J White - Disappearance of £13,979 from the figures
mark price made this Freedom of Information request to Local Government Ombudsmen
The request was refused by Local Government Ombudsmen.
From: mark price
28 December 2009
Dear Local Government Ombudsmen,
Please refer carefully to Ms Pook's responses to my request of 15
October 09 and 29 October 09 (entitled Expenses claimed by LGO
Jerry White) and the following thread.
Ms Pook said that her first answer included expenditure that was
not relevant to an expenses enquiry. As a consequence she changed
the figures that she had previously given under the FOI Act.
1. In the revised figures Jerry White's Hotel/Subsistence
expenditure 06/07 went down by £4,228.
If the Commission didn't pay this amount directly, and Mr White
didn't claim it as expenses, on whose budget was the £4,228
expenditure and why did they pay for it?
2. In the revised figures Jerry White's Other Travel expenditure
06/07 went down by £9,751.
If the Commission didn't pay this amount directly, and Mr White
didn't claim it as expenses, on whose budget was the £9,751
expenditure and why did they pay for it?
Yours faithfully,
mark price
From: Foi Officer
Local Government Ombudsmen
11 January 2010
These points have been responded to in my letter of today's date, reference CS/09/138
Hilary Pook
Communications & Records Manager | DL: 020 7217 4734 |
Local Government Ombudsman's offfice | 10th Floor |
Millbank Tower | Millbank | London | SW1P 4QP |
www.lgo.org.uk |
|
show quoted sections
mark price left an annotation (26 January 2010)
11 January 2009
Mr M Price
Via email ([FOI #21221 email])
Our ref: CS/09/0138/HJP
(Please quote our reference when contacting us)
If telephoning contact Hilary Pook on 020 7217 4734
or if using email send to: [email address]
Dear Mr Price
Request for information
In your email of 8 December, you raised a number of queries about the details of travel expenses claimed by Jerry White, which I had sent you in response to your request CS/09/119.
The information provided to you so far has been held in our computerised accounting system. In order to respond to the new questions you raise, we would have to retrieve archived hard copy expense claims and associated invoices, as the computerised system does not hold sufficient details to provide the answers. The amount of time required in identifying the correct archive boxes to retrieve and to go through the files they contain would be longer than the 18 hours allowed by the current fees limit. I am therefore not responding to your request on the grounds set out in Section 12(1) of the Freedom of Information Act; that the cost of compliance exceeds the current fees limit (£450).
You also sent an email on 10 December, asking further questions. I will deal with these here as well. You asked who paid the differences in the figures I provided in my initial response to your first request about Mr White's expenses and the corrected response. In both cases, as I tried to explain in my letter of 25 November, the figures were wrong, so there is no question of these amounts being paid in some other way - the expenditure was not incurred on the items asked about.
On your final question, the question as it was put in your email of 29 October was not answered because the figures were incorrect - therefore the question did not apply. As you have rephrased it in your email of 10 December, your calculations are incorrect. On your assumption of an LGO working 219 days a year, the 1995/96 figure would be over £4.50 a day, and therefore nearly £23 per week (assuming you are calculating working days). Also, you ask why Mr White claimed 200 times as much in 2008/09 as he did in 1995/96. The difference between the £1,000 claimed in 1995/96 and the £10,667 claimed in 2008/09 is 10.7 times, not 200 times. To provide any more detail on the reasons for the differences would again take the time spent over the cost limit - as above.
That concludes my response. If you feel I have not dealt properly with your request, you have the right to appeal and, should you wish to do so, I can supply a copy our internal complaints procedure. If you do request an internal review - can you please indicate why you are unhappy with my response. You also have the right to apply to the Information Commissioner to determine whether your request has been properly dealt with. You should note however that the Commissioner will not consider any complaint where you have not first exhausted our internal complaints process or where there has been undue delay in contacting him. You will be able to obtain further details of the Information Commissioner's role from the website on www.ico.gov.uk.
Yours sincerely
Hilary Pook
Hilary Pook (Ms)
Communications and Records Manager
Things to do with this request
- Add an annotation (to help the requester or others)
- Download a zip file of all correspondence
Make and explore Freedom of Information requests






George Cant left an annotation (25 January 2010)
What answer did the LGO send youon this, did they send it direct ?
Link to this