Kinship Care Assessment & Suitability

Dear Nottingham City Council,

1. Please explain Nottingham City Council's policy and framework on
assessing extended family members as suitable carers for children.

2. Please explain the policy and framework on viability assessments
of extended family members as suitable carers.

3. Please list the appropriate Common Law (as codified in Magna
Carta 1297 and the British Constitution incorporating the Rights of
the Subject 1689 and any other appropriate declarations of private
citizens' rights before and since), any appropriate child
protection Statutes (eg the Children And Young Persons Act 1989),
and any other appropriate local byelaws and Statutes that question
1 applies to.

4. Please list the reasons Nottingham City Council would knowingly
mislead the Family Courts by knowingly filing inaccurate reports to
court.

5. What steps are taken by NCC when the filing of inaccurate
reports to court occurs to ensure those involved are
reprimanded/disciplined and what steps are taken to ensure this is
matter is rectified?

Yours faithfully,

James Moore

Dear Information Governance,

To quote your reply, and in response:

Nottingham City Council has reached the decision that these are
vexatious requests
as defined by section 14 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. In
applying section

14 the Council has considered a significant number of factors
including, in no

particular order,

 The substantially similar nature of these requests to previous

requests you
have made.

I have made precisely zero similar requests. Please supply the IP
if this particular request and the IPs of any other request that
you think I have made to this or any other local authority that you
consider is "substantially similar". Otherwise, stop dodging and
answer the questions, if you please.

 The fact that your requests ask for information that is clearly
not in the realm of
a local authority.

Really? Some very simple questions regarding the behaviour of a
Local Authority should be easy to answer. Why do you find it so
difficult?

 The apparent lack of a serious and proper purpose to many of your
questions.

I am not obliged to make you aware of my purposes, however your
lack of willingness to respond directly to the questions, is, for
my purposes, an answer in itself. Thank you.

 The fact that you appear to be acting as part of a campaign.

I am not. I hope that clears things up for you.

 The repeated use of fractious, contentious and plainly defamatory
language in
your requests.

Excuse me? Please, tell me exactly where? I have documentary proof
from your own internal communications of everything I say that you
claim to be "defamatory". Such as your agreement with Nottingham
Family and Youth Court and a representative of Shelton's
Solicitors, that the clause 6 and clause 8 human rights of at least
one family were to be summarily ignored during a care proceeding.
Would you like me to publish that? Then would you like to deny that
as being "fractious, contentious and plainly defamatory" when the
evidence is staring two hundred million people in the face?

 Your continued use of leading questions.

Such as? I tried to make my questions as simple as possible, even
to the point of translating them to Legalese to make it easier for
your legal team to understand. Sorry if they sound leading but that
is the language of legal.

 The unreasonable burden placed upon the Authority by the need to
respond to
your requests.

Unreasonable exactly how? All I asked for were basically some
definitions and clarifications of NCC public policy.

After consideration of the above we are of the opinion that your
enquiries can be fairly
classified as obsessive and are having the effect of harassing this
Authority and, in
line with the aforementioned section of the Freedom of Information
Act 2000 and
available guidance from the Information Commissioners Office, it is
our opinion that
your requests are vexatious.

I deny those accusations and repeat my line of questions in their
entirety. You have the remaining statutory period in which to
respond satisfactorily as from the date my request was initially
made.

Yours sincerely,

James Moore

Dear Information Governance,

Please forward this thread to the Internal Reviewing Officer, from
whom I expect a satisfactory explanation as to why my wholly
legitimate FOI request has been delayed or ignored, and a
satisfactory response to the FOI request itself, in its entirety
and without claims of vexatiousness or unsubstantiated claims of
plagiarism or duplication.

Yours sincerely,

James Moore