Number of on duty officers

Dear Paul

Freedom of Information Request Reference No:2010010001080

I write in connection with your email which was received by Metropolitan
Police Service (MPS) on 08/01/2010.

Under section 8 of the Freedom of Information Act, a request is not deemed
to be 'valid' unless it is accompanied by the name of the applicant. At
present, name you have submitted does not meet this requirement. To assist
you, I have provided the relevant section of the Act below, and included
the link to the ICO guidance on valid names and addresses.

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/l...

Page 3 of the guidance contains a useful example which I have included
below:

"Mr Arthur Thomas Roberts could satisfy section 8(1)(b) of the FOIA by
stating his name in a request for information as “Arthur Roberts”,
“A. T. Roberts”, or “Mr Roberts”, but not by stating his name as
“Arthur” or “A.T.R.”

LEGAL APPENDIX

Section 8 of the Act provides:

(1) In this Act any reference to a "request for information" is a
reference to such a request which-

(a) is in writing,
(b) states the name of the applicant and an address for correspondence,
and
(c) describes the information requested.

To enable us to meet your request could you please resubmit your
application in accordance with the above requirement. If for any reason
you are unable to do so, please contact me for assistance.

We will consider your resubmitted request upon receipt as long as it meets
the requirement stated above. You will receive the information requested
within the statutory timescale of 20 working days as defined by the Act,
subject to the information not being exempt.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

If you are dissatisfied with this response please read the attached paper
entitled Complaint Rights which explains how to make a complaint.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please
contact me on 0207 0915565 or at the address at the top of this letter,
quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

Louise Lander
Higher Information Manager

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the case officer that dealt with your request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again -

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues and
assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 40 working days.

The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied with
the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for
a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their website at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk.
Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 01625 545 700

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Mason

Many thanks for sending this through to me - we will begin processing
your request.

Yours sincerely

Lou Lander

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Mason

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2010010001080
I write in connection with your request for information which was received
by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 13/01/2010. I note you seek
access to the following information:

* "May I please have the number of officers on duty, all ranks,
seperated into rank, in the Metropolitan borough of Harrow. To spare
identity issues, I am happy to have the attendance listed by shoulder
number. The date I require is 24th of Dec 2009 & 24 Dec 2008 ".

Your request will now be considered in accordance with the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (the Act). You will receive a response within
the statutory timescale of 20 working days as defined by the Act,
subject to the information not being exempt or containing a reference
to a third party. In some circumstances the MPS may be unable to
achieve this deadline. If this is likely you will be informed and
given a revised time-scale at the earliest opportunity.

Some requests may also require either full or partial transference to
another public authority in order to answer your query in the fullest
possible way. Again, you will be informed if this is the case.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Your attention is drawn to the attached sheet, which details your
right of complaint.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please
email me quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

A. Duncan
Policy & Support Team
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think
the decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the case officer that dealt with your
request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again ***

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is
to telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your
decision letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues
and assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision
of the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act)
regarding access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS
to have the decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 40 working days.
The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied
with the decision you may make application to the Information
Commissioner for a decision on whether the request for information has
been dealt with in accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information
Commissioner please visit their website at
www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk. Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 01625 545 700

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Mason

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2010010001080

I write in connection with your request for information dated 13.01.2010
which was received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 13/01/2010.
I note you seek access to the following information:

" May I please have the number of officers on duty, all ranks, separated
into rank,
in the Metropolitan borough of Harrow. To spare identity issues, I am
happy to
have the attendance listed by shoulder number.
The date I require is 24th of Dec 2009 & 24 Dec 2008"

DECISION:

This information is exempt under section 31(1)(a)(b)(c) Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (FoIA) governing Law Enforcement and s.40(2) of the
FoIA, governing personal information. This letter therefore serves as a
refusal notice. The relevant sections from the Freedom of Information Act
can be seen below in the Legal Appendix below.

As s.31 FoIA is a qualified and prejudice based exemption I am required to
provide you with a prejudice test evidencing any harm and complete a
public interest test.

Prejudice Test under s.31 FoIA:

In considering whether or not this information should be disclosed, I have
considered the potential harm that could be caused by disclosure.

If officer deployment data on specific dates were released into the public
domain there could potentially be substantial harm to the Police Service,
as it could inhibit its ability to fulfill its core functions. The release
of operational tactics and data on specific dates would furnish
individuals or groups having the necessary intent to disrupt police
activity with the necessary information to effectively do just that,
thereby hindering future operational activity.

This would consequently increase the capability for criminals, including
extremist networks, to target innocent members of the public. Any release
of information that would be likely to prejudice a police services'
ability to prevent and/or detect crime could only be viewed as being
harmful to members of the public.

Public Interest Test under s.31 FoIA:

The aim of the Freedom of Information Act is to make government bodies
more open and transparent. Releasing officer deployment data on the 24th
December in the years 2008 and 2009 would make the MPS openly accountable
for officer staffing levels, proving police deploy their resources in the
most suitable manner with the numbers available. Additionally, providing
the public with details of how we spend public funds and use our resources
show that Harrow Borough on these dates has utilised their biggest
resource, officers, efficiently. This would assist public debate.

The information requested relates to the efficiency and effectiveness of
the force or its officers. Regarding your request, forces may be obliged
to prove to the general public they are actively involved in initiatives
to reduce crime, thus ensuring public safety and confidence on these
specific dates. The release of the requested information would demonstrate
to the public the measures taken by the police to utilise resources where
and when they are believed by the public to be most needed on these dates
over the years.

However, to release the requested information about deployment levels on
specific dates on a specific borough could prevent the Service from
preventing and detecting crime, as well as hinder our ability to apprehend
offenders.

Information regarding police deployment data is a valuable commodity to
individuals (and/or organisations) wishing to commit crime, as it provides
an insight into tactics and resources available to the MPS. Therefore,
those seeking to commit criminality could counter any future policing
tactics and elude justice. This will ultimately have a detrimental impact
on innocent members of the public living or traveling within the Harrow
Borough.

The publication of the number of officers on the 24 December 2008 and 24
December 2009 could lead to those with criminal intentions taking
'informed' steps to counter policing, thereby potentially reducing police
effectiveness.

Releasing the requested information regarding deployment data on the 24
December in years 2008 and 2009 could leave Harrow vulnerable to criminals
utilising the information for malicious intent, including potential
terrorist threats. This could lead to an increase in crime if offenders
believed they were less likely to be apprehended in the future. This is
particularly the case if they obtained the information for various London
boroughs on these specific dates, enabling them to 'map' periods of
officer deployment over the capital.

As crime prevention/detection is in the 'public's interest', any release
of information which would be likely to prejudice our ability to prevent
and/or detect crime could only be viewed as being harmful to the public
interest.

After weighing up the competing interests I have determined that the
disclosure of the above information would not be in the public interest.
I consider that the benefit that would result from the information being
disclosed does not outweigh disclosing information relating to the number
of officers deployed on these specific dates. Therefore, this information
is exempt.

s.40(2) personal Information:

In order for the exemption provided under Section 40(2) to be engaged
disclosure of the requested information must satisfy either the first or
second condition as defined by subsections 3 and 4. In this instance the
disclosure of the requested information would lead to identification of
third party individuals. Therefore, as this would breach principle one of
the Data Protection Act, the duty of data controllers to process personal
information fairly and lawfully, and would fail to meet Condition 6 of
Schedule 2 of the DPA we see no legitimate interest in releasing any
information we hold for this purpose.

I am of the considered opinion not to disclose the attendance listed by
shoulder number. In this case the legitimate expectations of individuals,
possibly identifiable within the information requested is that their
information will not be disseminated within the public domain. Their
legitimate expectation would be that their personal information would be
treated confidentially and not disclosed to the public. I considered
opinion that an individual is entitled to a certain level of privacy
regarding their identity and thereby the release of the shoulder number
has the potential risk of identifying the individual(s) concerned.

LEGAL APPENDIX:

Section 17 (1)(a)(b)(c) (Refusal of request) of the Act provides:
(1) A public authority which, in relation to any request for information,
is to any extent relying on a claim that any provision of Part II relating
to the duty to confirm or deny is relevant to the request or on a claim
that information is exempt information must, within the time for complying
with section 1(1), give the applicant a notice which-
(a) states that fact,
(b) specifies the exemption in question, and
(c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption
applies.

Section 31 (1)(a)(b)(c) of the Act provides:
(1) Information which is not exempt information by virtue of section 30 is
exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be
likely to, prejudice;-
(a) the prevention and detection of crime;
(b) the apprehension or prosecution of offender;
(c) the administration of justice

s.40 Personal information provides:

(1) Any information to which a request for information relates is exempt
information if it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is the
data subject.
(2) Any information to which a request for information relates is also
exempt information if-
(a) it constitutes personal data which do not fall within subsection (1),
and
(b) either the first or the second condition below is satisfied.
(3) The first condition is-
(a) in a case where the information falls within any of paragraphs (a) to
(d) of the definition of "data" in section 1(1) of the [1998 c. 29.] Data
Protection Act 1998, that the disclosure of the information to a member of
the public otherwise than under this Act would contravene-
(i) any of the data protection principles, or
(ii) section 10 of that Act (right to prevent processing likely to cause
damage or distress), and
(b) in any other case, that the disclosure of the information to a member
of the public otherwise than under this Act would contravene any of the
data protection principles if the exemptions in section 33A(1) of the
[1998 c. 29.] Data Protection Act 1998 (which relate to manual data held
by public authorities) were disregarded.
(4) The second condition is that by virtue of any provision of Part IV of
the [1998 c. 29.] Data Protection Act 1998 the information is exempt from
section 7(1)(c) of that Act (data subject's right of access to personal
data).

Schedule 2, Condition 6 of the Data Protection Act provides:

6 (1) The processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate interests
pursued by the data controller or by the third party or parties to whom
the data are disclosed, except where the processing is unwarranted in any
particular case by reason of prejudice to the rights and freedoms or
legitimate interests of the data subject.
(2) The Secretary of State may by order specify particular circumstances
in which this condition is, or is not, to be taken to be satisfied.

Data Protection Act:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/Acts1998/ukp...

Personal Data is defined by Section 1 of the Data Protection Act as data
that relates to a living individual who can be identified.

Please see the below link which may be of use to you:

http://www.mpa.gov.uk/statistics/police-...

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

If you are dissatisfied with this response please read the attached paper
entitled Complaint Rights which explains how to make a complaint.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please
contact me on 02071613500 or at the address at the top of this letter,
quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

Audeeba Ali
Quality and Assurance Advisor

In complying with their statutory duty under sections 1 and 11 of the
Freedom of Information Act 2000 to release the enclosed information, the
Metropolitan Police Service will not breach the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act 1988. However, the rights of the copyright owner of the
enclosed information will continue to be protected by law. Applications
for the copyright owner's written permission to reproduce any part of the
attached information should be addressed to MPS Directorate of Legal
Services, 1st Floor (Victoria Block), New Scotland Yard, Victoria, London,
SW1H 0BG.
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the case officer that dealt with your request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again -

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues and
assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 40 working days.

The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied with
the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for
a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their website at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk.
Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 01625 545 700

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Mason

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2010010004168

I write in connection with your letter requesting that the Metropolitan
Police Service (MPS) review its response to your request for information
relating to:

* FOIA 2010010001080

The review will be conducted in accordance to the MPS's complaints
procedure. The MPS endeavour to respond to your complaint by 19 February
2010.

Should you have any further inquiries concerning this matter, please
contact me quoting the reference number above.

Thank you for your interest in the MPS.

Yours sincerely

S. Strong
FOIA Policy Research & Complaints Officer

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the case officer that dealt with your request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues and
assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 40 working days.
The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied with
the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for
a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their website at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk.
Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 01625 545 700

show quoted sections

Dear Mr. Mason

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2010010004168

Further to our email of 26 January 2010, I am now able to provide a full
response to your complaint dated 21 January 2010 concerning:

* Original FOIA request number 2010010001080.

I note you seek access to the following information:

"May I please have the number of officers on duty, all ranks, separated
into rank, in the Metropolitan borough of Harrow.
To spare identity issues, I am happy to have the attendance listed by
shoulder number.
The date I require is 24th of Dec 2009 & 24 Dec 2008"

DECISION

The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) has completed its review and has
decided to uphold the original decision to refuse access to the
information.

REASON FOR DECISION

Having examined the response provided to you in the original email from Ms
Ali, dated 20 January 2010, and upon reviewing the requested information,
I can confirm that I am of the considered opinion that the correct
decision was made.

As I have today decided to uphold Ms. Ali's decision to refuse access to
the requested information, I believe it unnecessary to repeat her sound
and robust arguments verbatim. However I hope to reiterate a few of the
most salient points in order to demonstrate why I believe the decision was
appropriate.

The use of Section 31(1)(a)(b) in this instance is wholly sound. To
provide details of officer deployment levels in a specific borough on a
specific day (for Christmas Eve) for two separate years could show
potential strength of officers in this borough in future years. Having
reviewed the requested information I can confirm that information about
the number of officers on duty on these two specific days, despite being
from two previous years, provides sufficient information to allow an
estimate of the number of officers and likely operational resources to be
deployed in future years.

Although under the Freedom of Information Act we cannot, and do not,
request the motives of any applicant, we must consider that a disclosure
under FOIA is a disclosure to the world. To provide information under the
Act shows a willingness to provide that same information to any other
person requesting it. We must therefore always consider the harm that
could be caused to our law enforcement capabilities if we were to disclose
information to individuals or a group of individuals with criminal
intentions. Whereas we have no doubt the vast majority of applications
under the Act are legitimate and do not have any ulterior motives, we must
be open to the fact that FOIA requests are not private transactions.

As articulated in the original response, this data would be a valuable
commodity to individuals (and/or organisations) wishing to commit crime in
the borough, as it provides an insight into the resources and operational
strength available to Harrow. If we were to disclose daily officer
deployment data under FOIA, we would be demonstrating an openness to do so
for all boroughs within London. A piecemeal approach to the disclosure of
this valuable information could enable those with ill intentions to create
a mosaic of data, and build up a picture of the numbers and ranks of
officers available to each borough during various shifts. Whereas one
disclosure, such as to this request, appears innocuous, a constant 'drip
feed' of data could seriously inhibit the ability of the MPS to prevent
and detect crime, apprehend offenders, and consequently administer justice
to those committing criminal acts in the capital.

For example, if we were to disclose the data for one borough in response
to one FOIA request, and then provided the data for exactly the same day
for another borough of a similar size and make up, we would potentially be
putting the borough with fewer officers at risk of increased crime -
something which we obviously do our utmost to avoid. If there was a
perceived weakness in the resource levels at one borough, those with
criminal intentions could target that area in the belief that there is
less chance of detection. This could then result in a diversion of
resources from a possibly more resourced area, leaving it vulnerable.

The prevention and detection of crime is the foundation upon which UK
policing is built. Specific resource information is valuable intelligence
which could be manipulated to hinder our law enforcement capabilities.
The MPS aim to be open and transparent in our actions, which is why
officer deployment details at borough level is made actively available to
the public - I notice Ms. Ali sent you a link to such information in the
original response. The fact that we have made this information available
shows our commitment to this. However, it also serves to highlight that
this is the level of information that we believe is safe for public
consumption. Further breakdowns, i.e. by date, such as this, or by ward,
are perceived by the MPS to be damaging to our ability to enforce the law,
as previously explained.

I would like to take this opportunity to draw your attention to an I.C.O.
Decision Notice which has relevance here. Whilst I appreciate your
arguments for disclosure, and can confirm they have been looked at whilst
I have considered the public interest, to disclose the information you
have requested into the public domain could potentially compromise the
current and future law enforcement role of the MPS by disclosing areas
that can be exploited. In support of this rationale I would like to draw
your attention to the following Information Commissioners Decision Notice
(Reference: FS50123769). This request was for officer deployment at a
specific football match, and the Information Commissioner was of the
opinion that when determining whether to disclose the deployment of police
officers at football matches they were in favour of non-disclosure and
determined that section 31 was rightly engaged. The Decision Notice states
at page 8 states: '***where disclosure of the information would compromise
tactics that may be employed in future, similar police operations the
information falls within the exemption at s.31 of the Act. Information on
the numbers of officers and how they are deployed throughout the match
together with the geographical area covered by the operation is similarly
exempt as it could be used to identify any weaknesses in such an
operations and to identify locations where criminal activity is less
likely to be detected. This would be likely to be of assistance to those
planning disorder at football matches in the future.' The Decision Notice
goes on to further state: '***.to release this information could either
expose weaknesses in the police operation or increase the vulnerability of
officers. The Commissioner is satisfied therefore that this information is
exempt.'

To read the full Decision Notice please follow the following link:

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/d...

Here we can see a strong similarity to your request. Although the
information requested by this applicant was for historic information about
officer deployment at football matches, links can be made to your request
for historic information about deployments on borough. The Information
Commisioner was of the opinion that to disclose the requested information
into the public domain would invariably release law enforcement
techniques. I believe the same applies here, as argued above. Releasing
our law enforcement techniques / capabilities will be detrimental to the
MPS' ability to prevent and detect crime, and to apprehend and prosecute
offenders. Police resources and our protection role would likely to be
negatively affected and manipulated by those with criminal intent to
obtain an unfair advantage over MPS resources. Upon this basis I find it
is not in the public interest to compromise the MPS commitment to being
efficient and effective in our role as law enforcers.

It may be pertinent to note here that the public interest is not what
interests the public but what will be of greater good, if released, to the
community as a whole. My decision to refuse access to the information you
have requested is based on what is in the public interest and not what is
of interest to the public.

With regard to the use of section 40(2) in the original response, I
believe that the exemption need not be applied in regard to this request.
To provide you with a list of shoulder numbers would inadvertently
provide you with the number of officers deployed during the dates
requested by default. Therefore I strongly believe that the application
of section 31(1)(a)(b) covers this matter and there is no need to consider
the section 40(2) exemption.

I appreciate that this is not the response that you would have liked, but
hope that my explanation above provides you with the rationale behind my
decision to exempt the requested information under section 31(1)(a)(b).

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

If you are dissatisfied with this response please read the attached paper
entitled Complaint Rights which explains how to contact the Information
Commissioner with your complaint.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please
contact me on 020 7161 3527 or at the address at the top of this letter,
quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

Shannon Aldridge
Quality and Assurance Advisor
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the case officer that dealt with your request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again ***

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues and
assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 40 working days.
The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied with
the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for
a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their website at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk.
Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 01625 545 700

show quoted sections