Release of Documents

Keith edmunds made this Freedom of Information request to Local Government Ombudsmen

The request was refused by Local Government Ombudsmen.

From: Keith edmunds

10 August 2010

Dear Local Government Ombudsmen,

Reference: My complaint to you: 10 000 639/BAM2/ssr about
Portsmouth City Council.

I was informed by letter from you dated 14 July 2010 that you have
received a response from Portsmouth City Council about my complaint
to you, about them. Since then I have had no communication from
you. My freedom of information request is therefore to provide all
correspondence related to this complaint, including the complete
response from Portsmouth City Council. Please also provide copies
of all transcripts and notes that you have made, concerning any
conversations you have had with Portsmouth City Council, with
regards to my complaint against them, referred to above.

Yours faithfully,

Keith Edmunds

Link to this

Trevor R Nunn left an annotation (10 August 2010)

Keith, they have a valid FOI exemption regarding any information they obtained from the Council. (The Council doesn't!) PS The exemption does not include information produced by themselves.

Section 32 (2) LG Act 1974: Information obtained by a Local Commissioner, or any officer of either Commission, in the course of or for the purposes of an investigation under this Part of this Act shall not be disclosed.

Link to this

From: Keith edmunds

16 August 2010

Dear Local Government Ombudsmen,
I am in receipt of your written acknowledgement to my FOI request:
Your 10 000 639 FOI ref no: B/10/0060 dated 13 August 2010.

Please in future pass all communications through this website.

You will be aware that on the Information Commissioner's ruling,
Public Authorities have no exemption from not communicating through
this website.

Yours faithfully,

Keith Edmunds

Link to this

From: Foi Officer
Local Government Ombudsmen

18 August 2010

Dear Mr Edmunds

I think you'll find the IC's ruling was that public authorities cannot refuse to deal with a request made via the website, not that they have to respond using the website. We will continue to respond to emails.

Yours sincerely

Hilary Pook
Communications & Records Manager | DL: 020 7217 4734 |
Local Government Ombudsman's office | 10th Floor |
Millbank Tower | Millbank | London | SW1P 4QP |
www.lgo.org.uk |

show quoted sections

Link to this

Trevor R Nunn left an annotation (18 August 2010)

Keith

You submitted a valid FOI request using this website as a return address for their response.

"My freedom of information request is therefore to provide all correspondence related to this complaint, including the complete response from Portsmouth City Council. Please also provide copies of all transcripts and notes that you have made, concerning any conversations you have had with Portsmouth City Council, with regards to my complaint against them, referred to above."

When they deviated from your preference you confirmed your preference for them to use this address for all responses regarding your FOI request.

"Please in future pass all communications through this website."

Pook appears to forget that they should respond to the address given for a response. FOI Act asks for an "address for correspondence", and that the email address you are using (this website) is sufficient.

If they don't respond to the address you have given (this website) one could argue that they have failed to respond to a valid FOI request.

You have two options, complain to the ICO because they have failed to respond to the address given or copy and paste all their off-line responses below this request. However, if you do you can hardly complain they didn't respond.

Having said that they still have a number of exemptions they could (will) use to deny you the information.

Link to this

A Johnson left an annotation ( 7 September 2010)

ICO has informed another public authority that they MUST respond to an FOI request made via the What Do They Know website to the What Do They now website.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ne...

Link to this

From: Keith edmunds

9 September 2010

Dear Foi Officer,
By law you should respond to FOI requests promptly and should
normally have responded to this request by 8 September 2010. Please
provide a full reply to my FOI request on this website immediately.

Yours sincerely,

Keith Edmunds

Link to this

From: David Pollard
Local Government Ombudsmen

13 September 2010

Attachment image001.jpg
2K Download

Attachment attachment.doc
116K Download View as HTML

Attachment Cx enq.doc
49K Download View as HTML

Dear Mr Edmunds

Further to my letter of 3 September 2010 in which I responded to your
request, I attach an electronic copy with an electronic version of Mr
Miles’s letter of enquiry to the Council. We do not hold electronic
copies of the two emails I sent you in hard copy..

Yours sincerely

David Pollard

Acting Assistant Ombudsman | DL: 02476 820062 |

The Oaks No 2 | Westwood Way | Westwood Business Park | Coventry | CV4 8JB
|

[1]www.lgo.org.uk |

[2]LGO 4 col SML at 70%

NOTICE - This message contains information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you have received this message in error please advise us at once and do not make any use of the information.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.lgo.org.uk/

Link to this

Anne Hide left an annotation (13 September 2010)

"We do not hold electronic copies of the two emails I sent you in hard copy."

No computer copies of emails retained, only a hard copies kept. Pull the other one!

Link to this

From: Keith edmunds

14 September 2010

Dear Local Government Ombudsmen,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of
Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Local Government
Ombudsman's handling of my FOI request 'Release of Documents'.

I am asking for an internal review for the following reasons:

1. There should be full disclosure in any judicial/or any other
inquiry, so that both parties can review and comment on any
information provided by the Counter-party. This is a basic tenet of
English Law. Withholding information marked 'confidential' by
Portsmouth City Council is both counter to English and Natural Law,
and makes a mockery of the Local Government Ombudsman's claim to be
unbiased in his so called investigation system - all information
should be seen and commented on by both parties in the complaint.
2. At a previous investigation of a complaint I made against
Portsmouth City Council (as stated in my non published emails), I
stated that a previous Chief Executive Portsmouth City Council had
lied in a response to the Local Government Ombudsman. This I proved
conclusively, yet nothing was done about it by the Local Government
Ombudsman, whom I then accused of aiding and abetting perjury (a
criminal offence) by the said Chief Executive. Release of these
documents would dispel any further impression of collusion between
the Local Government Ombudsman and the Council.
3. There is much published evidence of the Local Government
Ombudsman, covering up maladministration against Councils, and I
myself have made formal complaints about this. I have also
published the evidence online of previous cover ups, of complaints
made by myself, by both personnel in question here - Mr D.J.
Pollard (Acting Assistant Ombudsman) and Mr Brian Miles (Senior
Investigator).
I therefore request that neither of these persons be involved in
the internal review, nor should be Mr Neville Jones, Deputy
Ombudsman, for similar reasons. I will be quite happy to publish
links to this evidence of cover ups by the Local Government
Ombudsman on this website, with regards to my previous complaints,
should it be required.
4. A further reason for my request for an internal review, is that
the documentation already received (both the Senior Investigator's
letter to the Council and their response) bears very little
resemblance to my complaint; much of it has been ignored. I
therefore believe that a further cover up may be in train.
5. I further request that the names and status of those carrying
out the internal review be published with the formal reply to the
internal review; and, because of the seriousness of my allegations,
that the Ombudsman herself be involved in the internal review.
5. I wish all information, with regards to this investigation as
initially requested by me be published on this website, to achieve
full transparency of both my complaint and it's investigation.
6. I trust I need not point out that making a false response to a
freedom of Information request is a criminal offence.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is
available on the Internet at this address:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/re...

Yours faithfully,

Keith Edmunds

Link to this

Keith edmunds left an annotation (14 September 2010)

It is most interesting that the second letter released above by the LGO, about my complaint, to the Chief Executive, Portsmouth City Council 2010, is dated 11 September 2010.
Particularly interesting as the Chief Executive, Portsmouth City Council, replied to this letter on 13 July 2010.
If you are corrupt, to be successful, you also have to be competent.
MAKING FALSE STATEMENTS TO A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST, IS A CRIMINAL OFFENCE.

Link to this

Trevor R Nunn left an annotation (15 September 2010)

Download the Cx enq.doc version and it is clearly dated the 11th September 2010. View the HTML version and it is clearly dated the 11th June 2010.

However, no such double dating in the preceding Refusal 96 information when comparing the document version with the html version.

Link to this

Keith edmunds left an annotation (16 September 2010)

Two days have now passed and I have not had a response from this corrupt Institution about my request for an internal review. I do not use the adjective 'corrupt' lightly,there is much evidence of this on the internet. Visit the following links for incontrovertible evidence of this corruption:

http://www.ombudsmanwatch.org.uk/

http://www.psow.co.uk/

I will next put on a link on this website about how this corruption has affected me personally, if I do not get a response within 24 hours from the LGO with regards to my request for an internal review.

Link to this

Anne Hide left an annotation (16 September 2010)

I doubt the ICO would accept anything less than a week or so as an unreasonable delay on the part of a public authority acknowledging an FOI requester's correspondence.

Link to this

Trevor R Nunn left an annotation (17 September 2010)

How Local Government Ombudsmen get away with running an unjust, unfair and biased system of justice.

The Local Government Ombudsman and their seven pillars of injustice

http://lgowatcher.blogspot.com/2010/08/i...

Link to this

Anne Hide left an annotation (18 September 2010)

If anyone is unhappy at the way the Local Government Ombudsmen operate they should submit a response to the law commission's review of public service ombudsmen which includes all three local government ombudsmen or at least make a comment on the sister site to this one when questions are asked in the house about the local government ombudsman.

They Work For You

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=...

Link to this

A Johnson left an annotation (18 September 2010)

If the LGO haven't got a policy that covers the situation they will just make one up.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/to...

If the LGO haven't got the minutes to a meeting they will just make them up.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/th...

If they need others to sign fabricated documents they can call upon their ex colleagues.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/re...

If they don't want you to see a document they will try and keep it confidential

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/to...

Whilst they are allowed to fabricating documents, manipulate statistics and conjure up policy on the fly you don't stand a chance of getting at the truth through the Local Government Ombudsman.

Link to this

Pauline Nunn left an annotation (19 September 2010)

In addition to all their other tricks they also fail to record or destroy any embarrassing information.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/lo...

Link to this

A Johnson left an annotation (23 September 2010)

http://ombudsmanwatchers.org.uk/blogs/?p...

Link to this

From: Keith edmunds

28 September 2010

Dear David Pollard,
I am in receipt of your email: 28 September 2010 10:58:42
GMT+01:00.

It was sent to me personally. I asked for all correspondence
between me and the Local Government Ombudsman, on this Freedom of
Information request, be published on this website. You have not
done so. Please put your email, referenced above on this website.

With regards to the information contained within it, that Mr
Neville Jones, Deputy Ombudsman, will carry out the review, this is
entirely unacceptable, for the reasons I have given above in my
request for an internal review. I give you the reason again - Mr
Neville Jones had been involved in Local Government Ombudsman cover
up's with regards to my previous complaints and therefore is
neither fit nor trustworthy enough to carry out this review. Please
pass this on to the Ombudsman as originally requested.

Yours sincerely,

Keith Edmunds

Link to this

From: Keith edmunds

8 October 2010

Dear David Pollard,

http://ombudsmanwatchers.org.uk/personal...

Yours sincerely,

Keith Edmunds

Link to this

Trevor R Nunn left an annotation ( 9 October 2010)

The interesting thing to note about LGO reviews is that the person who reviews the case only uses case work paperwork and evidence given to them, and filtered by, the Investigator. This allows the investigator to rig the case work paperwork and evidence to support their view of the case. It is nigh on impossible to get anyone above investigator to actually get of their backsides and review a case properly.

This has happened to me twice and I have been let down by the Ombudsman twice.

http://lgowatcher.blogspot.com/

Link to this

Trevor R Nunn left an annotation ( 9 October 2010)

Forgot to add a link to my last annotation. Whilst it is difficult to believe that Ombudsmen need no qualifications to do their job what is even more alarming is that they have the authority to delegate their function to other even less qualified and experienced Commission staff. Legally and technically this could be the office cleaner. However, having said that office cleaners would probably do a better job than most investigators/assistant ombudsmen and deputies currently do.

http://lgowatcher.blogspot.com/2010/08/i...

Link to this

From: Keith edmunds

26 October 2010

Dear David Pollard,

When will I get the outcome of your internal review to my FOI
request from the Ombudsman. You are now outside the time limit to
provide this, and therefore, in breach of the law. I repeat, what I
have already said that it is totally unacceptable for the Deputy
Ombudsman, Mr Neville Jones, to carry out this review, for the
reasons already given, and that I expect a reply from the Ombudsman
herself.

Yours sincerely,

Keith Edmunds

Link to this

From: David Pollard
Local Government Ombudsmen

26 October 2010

I shall be out of the office until Thursday 28 October 2010. I will deal with your enquiry on my return. If you have a Freedom of Information request please email [email address].

NOTICE - This message contains information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you have received this message in error please advise us at once and do not make any use of the information.

Link to this

From: Keith edmunds

26 October 2010

Dear David Pollard,

This FOI request should now be out of your hands, and in the hands
of the Ombudsman herself, for internal review, so I do not see why
I should wait for you to return, to your office for the internal
review to be sent to me. It would appear that more corruption is
taking place within your organisation.

Yours sincerely,

Keith Edmunds

Link to this

From: David Pollard
Local Government Ombudsmen

28 October 2010

Dear Mr Edmunds

Mr Jones wrote to you on 25 October 2010 to give you the outcome of the internal review and you should have received it by now. Please let me know if you have not and I shall arrange for a further copy to be sent.

Yours sincerely

David Pollard
Acting Assistant Ombudsman | DL: 02476 820062 |
The Oaks No 2 | Westwood Way | Westwood Business Park | Coventry | CV4 8JB |
www.lgo.org.uk |

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Keith edmunds

28 October 2010

Dear David Pollard,

I have told you twice now that I do not wish for Mr Jones to carry
out the internal review for the clear reasons that I have already
given. I have not received the letter and as I have already stated,
all communication on this matter should be posted on this website,
please do so.
Please get the Ombudsman to carry out the internal review, not Mr
Jones; Mr Jones is not a fit and proper person to carry out this
review. When it has been carried out by the Ombudsman, post it on
this website, thank you.

Yours sincerely,

Keith Edmunds

Link to this

From: David Pollard
Local Government Ombudsmen

28 October 2010

Dear Mr Edmunds

I confirm that the Ombudsman will not be dealing with your request. Mr Jones's letter explains why he is dealing with the matter. In the light of this information please confirm whether you wish Mr Jones's letter to be posted on this website.

Yours sincerely

David Pollard
Acting Assistant Ombudsman | DL: 02476 820062 |
The Oaks No 2 | Westwood Way | Westwood Business Park | Coventry | CV4 8JB |
www.lgo.org.uk |

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Keith edmunds

28 October 2010

Dear David Pollard,

Yes please, post it on this website. I have not yet received the
letter.

Yours sincerely,

Keith Edmunds

Link to this

From: David Pollard
Local Government Ombudsmen

29 October 2010

Attachment Let from NJ to comp re FOI Appeal.doc
68K Download View as HTML

Dear Mr Edmunds

Letter attached as requested.

Yours sincerely

David Pollard
Acting Assistant Ombudsman | DL: 02476 820062 |
The Oaks No 2 | Westwood Way | Westwood Business Park | Coventry | CV4 8JB |
www.lgo.org.uk |

show quoted sections

Link to this

Trevor R Nunn left an annotation (29 October 2010)

More evidence that the Local Government Ombudsman doesn't follow the principles of natural justice. How can it be fair that information given to them by others can't be seen and validated by the complainant. How is that fair? How is that just?

Where is the independent scrutiny that any information withheld from the complainant was done for the right reason rather than for corrupt reasons?

http://lgowatcher.blogspot.com/2010/08/i...

Link to this

Keith edmunds left an annotation (29 October 2010)

I agree Trevor, In this case however. I have already received the information from a similar FOI request to Portsmouth City Council, so there can be no reason whatsoever for them not to send the information. Except of course that one of their letters has been clearly fabricated - their letter to PCC dated 11 September 2010. If they had provided the information, they would have left themselves wide open to criminal prosecution for providing false information to a FOI request! More blatant corruption!

Link to this

Things to do with this request

Anyone:
Local Government Ombudsmen only:
 
Would you like to work with the team that built this site? We’re recruiting.