Rejection of Ombudsmans Recommendation

Dear Sir,

I apologise for our delay in responding to your request(s). I have
contacted the department(s), who are having difficulty sourcing the
information you need, and a response will be sent out forthwith.

Yours sincerely.
Richard Roscoe.

Richard Roscoe.
Data Protection and Information Security Officer.
Sefton Council,
1st Floor, Balliol House,
Balliol Road,
Bootle, Merseyside.
L20 3FF
Tel: 0151 934 4416
Fax: 0151 934 4157
e: [email address]

Please don't print this e-mail unless you have to. It wastes paper and
it can create a security risk.

show quoted sections

Dear Sir,

Re - FOI551 - Rejection of Ombudsmans Recommendation

My apologies for our delay in responding to your request. Our Legal
department have considered your letter and their responses are detailed
below.

1- would you please identify if over the last three years you
have
habitually breached the FoI Act when responding to a Local
Government Ombudsman ['LGO'] investigation. Please identify by
year

2005/2006 2006/2007 01.04.2007/ 31.03.2008

The number of complaints raised with you by the LGO for each year
that took you more than 20 days to respond to. Please
additionally
provide any legal advice provided to the Council that it was
permissable to break the law (Freedom of Information Act), and if
the Council identified that it had broken the law to the
Ombudsman
on each occassion it failed to observe the FoI as part of the
LGO's
investigation for a complainant when responding to the LGO.
Please
provide any documentation or documentation available in a summary
format.

Response - For your information the Council has not "habitually
breached the FOI act when responding to a Local Government Ombudsman
Investigation". The timescales for the complaints raised by the LGO
which took more than 20 days to respond to - this information is held by
the LGO as far as timescales etc are concerned and is contained in the
LGO's annual letters (attached). The Council is not aware of any case of
failing to observe the FOI Act. As you know, the investigation of
complaints regarding FOI is carried out by the Information Commissioners
Office and not the LGO.

2. It is understood that there have been two formal findings of
maladministration causing injustice by Sefton since 31.03.2008
(http://www.lgo.org.uk/news/info.php?refn...). Has the Sefton
Council rejected the finding of maladministration and
recommendations of the LGO with respect to both complaints.
Please
provide all documentation.

Response - Documentation on these cases has already been provided to
you in response to the similar request you have sent us (our ref FOI561
- Complaints to LGO).

3. It is likely based on Sefton's record that there have been a
number of local settlements since 31.03.2008 that the Sefton
Council identified to the Ombudsman that it would oberve prior to
the LGO discontinuing their investigation. Has Sefton Council
regnaged on any local settlements.

Response - No, Sefton Council has not reneged on any local
settlements?

4. It is understood that Sefton Council is required by law to
maintain its records for at least six years. Please provide any
documentation identifying that Sefton Council is seeking to
reconstitute its records related to its acts of maaldministration
and injustice identified by the LGO.

Response - The requirement to keep these records is common practice,
not statutory. In answer to your question we have spoken to the LGO and
obtained the yearly letters (attached) but we do not intend to retrieve
any further documentation as they can all be obtained from LGO
themselves. LGO can be contacted via Jane Burns on [email address] .
I have spoken to the Information Commissioner's Office and they also
feel that this is an acceptable solution given the circumstances.

Please refer any further queries to [email address] .

Regards,
Richard Roscoe.

Richard Roscoe.
Data Protection and
Information Security Officer.
Sefton Council ICT Client.
4th Floor, Merton House,
Stanley Rd, Bootle. L20 3JA.

Tel: 0151 934 4416
Please don't print this e-mail unless you have to. It wastes paper and
it can create a security risk.

<>This message is intended for named addressees only and may contain
confidential,
privileged or commercially sensitive information. If you are not a named
addressee
and this message has come to you in error you must not copy, distribute
or take any action
on its content. Please return the message to the sender by replying to
it immediately
and then delete it from your computer and destroy any copies of it.

All e-mail communications sent to or from Sefton Metropolitan Borough
Council
may be subject to recording and / or monitoring in accordance with
current legislation.

This message does not create or vary any contractual relationship
between Sefton
Metropolitan Borough Council and you.

Internet e-mail is not a 100% secure communication medium and Sefton
Metropolitan
Borough Council does not accept responsibility for changes made to this
message
after it was sent.

Whilst all reasonable care has been taken to ensure that this message is
virus-free,
it is the recipient's responsibility to carry out virus checks as
appropriate and ensure
that the onward transmission, opening or use of this message and any
attachments will not
adversely affect their systems or data. Sefton Metropolitan Borough
Council does not
accept any responsibility in this regard."

Dear Mr Carruthers.

You have now submitted 4 requests to us around the same subject and
have asked for reviews or raised complaints against all 4 responses. We
are unclear from your responses which individual items of information
have not been provided.

For your information the 4 requests were:

Freedom of Information request 539 - functions council (26/8/2008)
Freedom of Information request 551 - Rejection of Ombudsmans
Recommendation (3/9/2008)
Freedom of Information request 562 - Sefton Council (5/9/2008)
Freedom of Information request 561 - January 2008 (5/9/2008)

We would appreciate a single, simple list of the items that you feel we
have not provided and we shall commence our review as soon as we have
it. For your information I have spoken to the Information Commissioner
and they do not feel that asking you for combined clarification in these
circumstances is unreasonable.

We look forward to your response.

Richard Roscoe.
Data Protection and
Information Security Officer.
Sefton Council ICT Client.
4th Floor, Merton House,
Stanley Rd, Bootle. L20 3JA.

Tel: 0151 934 4416
Please don't print this e-mail unless you have to. It wastes paper and
it can create a security risk.

<>This message is intended for named addressees only and may contain
confidential,
privileged or commercially sensitive information. If you are not a named
addressee
and this message has come to you in error you must not copy, distribute
or take any action
on its content. Please return the message to the sender by replying to
it immediately
and then delete it from your computer and destroy any copies of it.

All e-mail communications sent to or from Sefton Metropolitan Borough
Council
may be subject to recording and / or monitoring in accordance with
current legislation.

This message does not create or vary any contractual relationship
between Sefton
Metropolitan Borough Council and you.

Internet e-mail is not a 100% secure communication medium and Sefton
Metropolitan
Borough Council does not accept responsibility for changes made to this
message
after it was sent.

Whilst all reasonable care has been taken to ensure that this message is
virus-free,
it is the recipient's responsibility to carry out virus checks as
appropriate and ensure
that the onward transmission, opening or use of this message and any
attachments will not
adversely affect their systems or data. Sefton Metropolitan Borough
Council does not
accept any responsibility in this regard."