Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson, Head of Northumbria Police's Professional Standards – Northumbria Police Named Worst Force in the Country For Dealing With Complaints …

Martin McGartland (Ataliwyd y cyfrif) made this Rhyddid Gwybodaeth request to Northumbria Police

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

Gwrthodwyd y cais gan Northumbria Police.

Martin McGartland (Ataliwyd y cyfrif)

Dear Northumbria Police,

A report by the Government's Home Affairs Committee has highlighted failings in the way Northumbria Police deals with complaints. The report revealed that when it came to appeals against the Northumbria Force's handling of specific complaints against it, the IPCC had ruled the force had made the wrong decision in 53% of cases.

It is also reported that;

Errors in the decision about whether to record a complaint ar particularly deleterious, as they give the complainant the impression from the outset that a case is not being taken seriously, or even that the force is trying to cover up misconduct

– House of Commons Home Affairs Committee

http://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/story/...

http://tyneandwear.sky.com/news/article/...

I want to place on the record that complaints I have made to Northumbria police during the past 12 years or more have been covered-up. I myself made complaints against Sue Sim, Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson (Head of Northumbria Police's Professional Standards) as well as many other senior officers. Each and every one of the complaints I have made were either covered-up, whitewashed, delayed (one complaint was delayed (by Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson) for 3 years before he, Northumbria Police whitewashed it too.
Others were never recorded and or simply ignored.

Other complaints I have made against Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson, Sue Sim and other senior officers, those which concern very serious corruption by them, have either not been recorded (by Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson) or have been whitewashed.

The report stated that; Para 60. "The root of the problem is that the front line of the police complaints system is notworking. It is unacceptable that Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson Departments had made the wrong decision in 38% of appeals. The number of appeal upheld varies wildly from force to
force..." However, the wrong decisions on the part of Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson and his, Northumbria Police's Professional Standards was much higher, it was, as above, 53% of cases.

I am requesting all recorded information Northumbria Police hold concerning following;

1. Details of Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson Salary for 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. Please also supply full details of all/any bonuses, allowances and or any other type of payments paid during above dates. Please also explain why such payments were paid.

I'm sure you would agree that there is a legitimate public interest in disclosure, and the disclosure of such information is in the public interest.

** For info: http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/l...

2. Given the seriousness of the report and also the public interest in same, I'm requesting all recorded information held concerning any action taken and or planed against Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson and or his Professional Standards Department resulting from the report and it's findings. I am referring to action taken (or planed) by Northumbria Police and or any other third parties.

3. Copies of all recorded information (letters, emails etc) between Northumbria Police and the Government's Home Affairs Committee, those which relate and are connected to this matter, report.

4. Copies of all recorded information (letters, emails etc) between Northumbria Police and Vera Baird, police and crime commissioner, those which relate and are connected to this matter, report.

5. Copies of all recorded information concerning what action Northumbria Police has taken and or action planed by them to dealt with the report, it's findings and to deal with the very serious failings by both Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson and his Professional Standards Department.

6. All recorded information held concerning any type of disciplinary action taken or planed against Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson following the report, its findings as well as his failings.

Kind regards,

Martin McGartland

- Highlighting serious Corruption within Northumbria Police: www.martinmcgartland.co.uk -

Northumbria Police

Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA)

Thank you for your email received today in which you make a request for
information that Northumbria Police may hold.

We are in the process of dealing with your request and a response should be
provided to you by 04/03/13.

Yours sincerely

Jan Mcewan
Disclosure Section

NORTHUMBRIA POLICE PRIVACY AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

The information contained in this message and any attachment(s) is confidential and intended only for the attention of the named organisation or individual to whom it is addressed. The message may contain information that is covered by legal, professional or other privilege. No mistake in transmission is intended to waive or compromise any such privilege. This message has been sent over public networks and the sender cannot be held responsible for its integrity.

If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or action taken in reliance of the information contained herein is strictly prohibited, and is contrary to the provisions of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act, 1988 and of the Data Protection Act, 1998.

Any views expressed are those of the sender and, unless specifically stated, do not necessarily represent the view of Northumbria Police.

We cannot accept any liability for any loss or damage sustained as a result of software viruses. It is your responsibility to carry out such virus checking as is necessary.

If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by e-mail at once and delete the message immediately.

For more information about Northumbria Police please visit our website - http://www.northumbria.police.uk

Martin McGartland (Ataliwyd y cyfrif)

Dear Northumbria Police,

Thank you for that. Can you please ensure that the recorded information connected to this case covers the period up until this request is answered.

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

www.martinmcgartland.co.uk

Northumbria Police

Mr McGartland

The information provided will be as of the date the request is received, ie
as of today Monday 4th February 2013, and not the date the request is
answered.
We can only provide recorded information that is held at the time of a
request.

Regards

Jan

From: Martin McGartland <[FOI #148319 email]> on
04/02/2013 10:33

To: [Northumbria Police request email]
cc:
Subject: Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 110/13 -
Complaints [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

Dear Northumbria Police,

Thank you for that. Can you please ensure that the recorded
information connected to this case covers the period up until this
request is answered.

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

www.martinmcgartland.co.uk

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Martin McGartland (Ataliwyd y cyfrif)

Dear Northumbria Police,

Please explain why that is?

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

www.martinmcgartland.co.uk - Highlighting serious corruption within Northumbria Police HQ

Northumbria Police

Dear Mr McGartland

This is in line with section 1.-(4) of the Act that states -
"The information,is the information in question held at the time when the
request is received."

The Act is available via the link below –
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000...

This practice is also recommended by the Information Commissioner

I attach a link below to the ICO website that provides further
clarification on why this practice should be followed, it states -
 
"You should normally disclose the information you held at the time of the
request."
http://www.ico.gov.uk/for_organisations/...

I hope this has clarified this matter for you.

Yours sincerely

Michael Cleugh
Data Protection & Disclosure Advisor

From:        Martin McGartland
<[FOI #148319 email]> on 13/02/2013 10:35

To:        [Northumbria Police request email]
cc:        
Subject:        Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 110/13
- Complaints [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

     Dear Northumbria Police,
   
    Please explain why that is?
   
    Yours faithfully,
   
    Martin McGartland
   
    www.martinmcgartland.co.uk - Highlighting serious corruption within
    Northumbria Police HQ
   
   

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Martin McGartland (Ataliwyd y cyfrif)

Dear Northumbria Police,

I have requested all recorded information held up until the date my request has been answered. The links, so far as I can see, relate to a normal request under FOIA i.e. where the requester has not asked for information up until the date the request has been answered.

Please supply all recorded information, as I have requested, up until the date this request has been answered.

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

www.martinmcgartland.co.uk - highlighting serious corruption within Northumbria Police HQ

Northumbria Police

Dear Mr McGartland

I believe my previous response was clear on this point, as you remain
dissatisfied, I suggest you contact the Information Commissioner's Office
for further clarification.

The Information Commissioner’s Office is the UK’s independent authority
set up to uphold information rights in the public interest, promoting
openness by public bodies and data privacy for individuals.

Yours sincerely

Michael Cleugh
Data Protection & Disclosure Advisor

From:        Martin McGartland
<[FOI #148319 email]> on 14/02/2013 03:40

To:        [Northumbria Police request email]
cc:        
Subject:        Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 110/13
- Complaints [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

     Dear Northumbria Police,
   
    I have requested all recorded information held up until the date my
    request has been answered. The links, so far as I can see, relate
    to a normal request under FOIA i.e. where the requester has not
    asked for information up until the date the request has been
    answered.
   
    Please supply all recorded information, as I have requested, up
    until the date this request has been answered.
   
    Yours faithfully,
   
    Martin McGartland
   
    www.martinmcgartland.co.uk - highlighting serious corruption within
    Northumbria Police HQ
   
   

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Martin McGartland (Ataliwyd y cyfrif)

Dear Northumbria Police,

You claim; "I believe my previous response was clear on this point,as you remain dissatisfied, I suggest you contact the Information Commissioner's Office for further clarification". You would say that, however, I believe you have not. Moreover, It is very clear from your above reply (including the link you included) that your previous response was far from 'clear'. I can see no detail within what you have sent to show what you are claiming.

In your 13 Feb email you wrote: 'This is in line with section 1.-(4) of the Act that states - "The information, is the information in question held at the time when the request is received." You supplied following link, a link that covers the entire FOIA legislation. I say you did this to try to confuse and or fob me off;
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000...

You also stated; "This practice is also recommended by the Information Commissioner I attach a link below to the ICO website that provides further clarification on why this practice should be followed, it states - "You should normally disclose the information you held at the time of the request." Where does it say that you, NP should not supply all recorded information that has been requested up until the date the request has been answered, as I have requested?

I will not be contacting the ICO regards this matter.

Under FOIA ' ... duty on public authorities to provide advice and assistance ...' I am now requesting details and or information from you, NP to show where the IC and or ICO have stated that requests, such as mine, for all recorded information, up until date the request is answered, should not or do not need to be dealt with as above? The above text you included appears to me to refer only to normal request/s, those which do not include 'up until the request is answered. NP have a legal duty to deal with request/s correctly.

NP can not continue to break the law simply because they want to conceal embarrassing information from the public.

Have you, NP spoke to ICO or contacted them about above? If not you may want to do so.

Yours faithfully

Martin McGartland

www.martinmcgartland.co.uk - Highlighting very serious corruption within Northumbria Police HQ

Northumbria Police

Dear Mr McGartland

I have offered you advce and assistance, so far as it would be reasonable
to expect an authority to do so. This is in line with section 16 of the
Act.

Should you be dissatisfied with any part of the response when it is sent
to you, the route of complaint will be provided to you with the response.

Yours sincerely

Michael Cleugh
Data Protection & Disclosure Advisor

From:        Martin McGartland
<[FOI #148319 email]> on 14/02/2013 15:42

To:        [Northumbria Police request email]
cc:        
Subject:        Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 110/13
- Complaints [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

     Dear Northumbria Police,
   
    You claim; "I believe my previous response was clear on this
    point,as you remain dissatisfied, I suggest you contact the
    Information Commissioner's Office for further clarification". You
    would say that, however, I believe you have not. Moreover, It is
    very clear from your above reply (including the link you included)
    that your previous response was far from 'clear'. I can see no
    detail within what you have sent to show what you are claiming.
   
    In your 13 Feb email you wrote: 'This is in line with section
    1.-(4) of the Act that states - "The information, is the
    information in question held at the time when the request is
    received." You supplied following link, a link that covers the
    entire FOIA legislation. I say you did this to try to confuse and
    or fob me off;
    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000...
   
    You also stated; "This practice is also recommended by the
    Information Commissioner I attach a link below to the ICO website
    that provides further clarification on why this practice should be
    followed, it states - "You should normally disclose the information
    you held at the time of the request." Where does it say that you,
    NP should not supply all recorded information that has been
    requested up until the date the request has been answered, as I
    have requested?
   
    I will not be contacting the ICO regards this matter.
   
    Under FOIA ' ... duty on public authorities to provide advice and
    assistance ...' I am now requesting details and or information from
    you, NP to show where the IC and or ICO have stated that requests,
    such as mine, for all recorded information, up until date the
    request is answered, should not or do not need to be dealt with as
    above? The above text you included appears to me to refer only to
    normal request/s, those which do not include 'up until the request
    is answered. NP have a legal duty to deal with request/s correctly.
   
    NP can not continue to break the law simply because they want to
    conceal embarrassing information from the public.
   
    Have you, NP spoke to ICO or contacted them about above? If not you
    may want to do so.
   
    Yours faithfully
   
    Martin McGartland
   
    www.martinmcgartland.co.uk - Highlighting very serious corruption
    within Northumbria Police HQ
   
   

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Northumbria Police

Dear Mr McGartland

I have offered you advce and assistance, so far as it would be reasonable
to expect an authority to do so. This is in line with section 16 of the
Act.

Should you be dissatisfied with any part of the response when it is sent
to you, the route of complaint will be provided to you with the response.

Yours sincerely

Michael Cleugh
Data Protection & Disclosure Advisor

From:        Martin McGartland
<[FOI #148319 email]> on 14/02/2013 15:42

To:        [Northumbria Police request email]
cc:        
Subject:        Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 110/13
- Complaints [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

     Dear Northumbria Police,
   
    You claim; "I believe my previous response was clear on this
    point,as you remain dissatisfied, I suggest you contact the
    Information Commissioner's Office for further clarification". You
    would say that, however, I believe you have not. Moreover, It is
    very clear from your above reply (including the link you included)
    that your previous response was far from 'clear'. I can see no
    detail within what you have sent to show what you are claiming.
   
    In your 13 Feb email you wrote: 'This is in line with section
    1.-(4) of the Act that states - "The information, is the
    information in question held at the time when the request is
    received." You supplied following link, a link that covers the
    entire FOIA legislation. I say you did this to try to confuse and
    or fob me off;
    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000...
   
    You also stated; "This practice is also recommended by the
    Information Commissioner I attach a link below to the ICO website
    that provides further clarification on why this practice should be
    followed, it states - "You should normally disclose the information
    you held at the time of the request." Where does it say that you,
    NP should not supply all recorded information that has been
    requested up until the date the request has been answered, as I
    have requested?
   
    I will not be contacting the ICO regards this matter.
   
    Under FOIA ' ... duty on public authorities to provide advice and
    assistance ...' I am now requesting details and or information from
    you, NP to show where the IC and or ICO have stated that requests,
    such as mine, for all recorded information, up until date the
    request is answered, should not or do not need to be dealt with as
    above? The above text you included appears to me to refer only to
    normal request/s, those which do not include 'up until the request
    is answered. NP have a legal duty to deal with request/s correctly.
   
    NP can not continue to break the law simply because they want to
    conceal embarrassing information from the public.
   
    Have you, NP spoke to ICO or contacted them about above? If not you
    may want to do so.
   
    Yours faithfully
   
    Martin McGartland
   
    www.martinmcgartland.co.uk - Highlighting very serious corruption
    within Northumbria Police HQ
   
   

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Northumbria Police

Dear Mr McGartland

I have offered you advce and assistance, so far as it would be reasonable
to expect an authority to do so. This is in line with section 16 of the
Act.

Should you be dissatisfied with any part of the response when it is sent
to you, the route of complaint will be provided to you with the response.

Yours sincerely

Michael Cleugh
Data Protection & Disclosure Advisor

From:        Martin McGartland
<[FOI #148319 email]> on 14/02/2013 15:42

To:        [Northumbria Police request email]
cc:        
Subject:        Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 110/13
- Complaints [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

     Dear Northumbria Police,
   
    You claim; "I believe my previous response was clear on this
    point,as you remain dissatisfied, I suggest you contact the
    Information Commissioner's Office for further clarification". You
    would say that, however, I believe you have not. Moreover, It is
    very clear from your above reply (including the link you included)
    that your previous response was far from 'clear'. I can see no
    detail within what you have sent to show what you are claiming.
   
    In your 13 Feb email you wrote: 'This is in line with section
    1.-(4) of the Act that states - "The information, is the
    information in question held at the time when the request is
    received." You supplied following link, a link that covers the
    entire FOIA legislation. I say you did this to try to confuse and
    or fob me off;
    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000...
   
    You also stated; "This practice is also recommended by the
    Information Commissioner I attach a link below to the ICO website
    that provides further clarification on why this practice should be
    followed, it states - "You should normally disclose the information
    you held at the time of the request." Where does it say that you,
    NP should not supply all recorded information that has been
    requested up until the date the request has been answered, as I
    have requested?
   
    I will not be contacting the ICO regards this matter.
   
    Under FOIA ' ... duty on public authorities to provide advice and
    assistance ...' I am now requesting details and or information from
    you, NP to show where the IC and or ICO have stated that requests,
    such as mine, for all recorded information, up until date the
    request is answered, should not or do not need to be dealt with as
    above? The above text you included appears to me to refer only to
    normal request/s, those which do not include 'up until the request
    is answered. NP have a legal duty to deal with request/s correctly.
   
    NP can not continue to break the law simply because they want to
    conceal embarrassing information from the public.
   
    Have you, NP spoke to ICO or contacted them about above? If not you
    may want to do so.
   
    Yours faithfully
   
    Martin McGartland
   
    www.martinmcgartland.co.uk - Highlighting very serious corruption
    within Northumbria Police HQ
   
   

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Northumbria Police

Dear Mr McGartland

I have offered you advce and assistance, so far as it would be reasonable
to expect an authority to do so. This is in line with section 16 of the
Act.

Should you be dissatisfied with any part of the response when it is sent
to you, the route of complaint will be provided to you with the response.

Yours sincerely

Michael Cleugh
Data Protection & Disclosure Advisor

From:        Martin McGartland
<[FOI #148319 email]> on 14/02/2013 15:42

To:        [Northumbria Police request email]
cc:        
Subject:        Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 110/13
- Complaints [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

     Dear Northumbria Police,
   
    You claim; "I believe my previous response was clear on this
    point,as you remain dissatisfied, I suggest you contact the
    Information Commissioner's Office for further clarification". You
    would say that, however, I believe you have not. Moreover, It is
    very clear from your above reply (including the link you included)
    that your previous response was far from 'clear'. I can see no
    detail within what you have sent to show what you are claiming.
   
    In your 13 Feb email you wrote: 'This is in line with section
    1.-(4) of the Act that states - "The information, is the
    information in question held at the time when the request is
    received." You supplied following link, a link that covers the
    entire FOIA legislation. I say you did this to try to confuse and
    or fob me off;
    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000...
   
    You also stated; "This practice is also recommended by the
    Information Commissioner I attach a link below to the ICO website
    that provides further clarification on why this practice should be
    followed, it states - "You should normally disclose the information
    you held at the time of the request." Where does it say that you,
    NP should not supply all recorded information that has been
    requested up until the date the request has been answered, as I
    have requested?
   
    I will not be contacting the ICO regards this matter.
   
    Under FOIA ' ... duty on public authorities to provide advice and
    assistance ...' I am now requesting details and or information from
    you, NP to show where the IC and or ICO have stated that requests,
    such as mine, for all recorded information, up until date the
    request is answered, should not or do not need to be dealt with as
    above? The above text you included appears to me to refer only to
    normal request/s, those which do not include 'up until the request
    is answered. NP have a legal duty to deal with request/s correctly.
   
    NP can not continue to break the law simply because they want to
    conceal embarrassing information from the public.
   
    Have you, NP spoke to ICO or contacted them about above? If not you
    may want to do so.
   
    Yours faithfully
   
    Martin McGartland
   
    www.martinmcgartland.co.uk - Highlighting very serious corruption
    within Northumbria Police HQ
   
   

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Northumbria Police

Dear Mr McGartland

I have offered you advce and assistance, so far as it would be reasonable
to expect an authority to do so. This is in line with section 16 of the
Act.

Should you be dissatisfied with any part of the response when it is sent
to you, the route of complaint will be provided to you with the response.

Yours sincerely

Michael Cleugh
Data Protection & Disclosure Advisor

From:        Martin McGartland
<[FOI #148319 email]> on 14/02/2013 15:42

To:        [Northumbria Police request email]
cc:        
Subject:        Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 110/13
- Complaints [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

     Dear Northumbria Police,
   
    You claim; "I believe my previous response was clear on this
    point,as you remain dissatisfied, I suggest you contact the
    Information Commissioner's Office for further clarification". You
    would say that, however, I believe you have not. Moreover, It is
    very clear from your above reply (including the link you included)
    that your previous response was far from 'clear'. I can see no
    detail within what you have sent to show what you are claiming.
   
    In your 13 Feb email you wrote: 'This is in line with section
    1.-(4) of the Act that states - "The information, is the
    information in question held at the time when the request is
    received." You supplied following link, a link that covers the
    entire FOIA legislation. I say you did this to try to confuse and
    or fob me off;
    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000...
   
    You also stated; "This practice is also recommended by the
    Information Commissioner I attach a link below to the ICO website
    that provides further clarification on why this practice should be
    followed, it states - "You should normally disclose the information
    you held at the time of the request." Where does it say that you,
    NP should not supply all recorded information that has been
    requested up until the date the request has been answered, as I
    have requested?
   
    I will not be contacting the ICO regards this matter.
   
    Under FOIA ' ... duty on public authorities to provide advice and
    assistance ...' I am now requesting details and or information from
    you, NP to show where the IC and or ICO have stated that requests,
    such as mine, for all recorded information, up until date the
    request is answered, should not or do not need to be dealt with as
    above? The above text you included appears to me to refer only to
    normal request/s, those which do not include 'up until the request
    is answered. NP have a legal duty to deal with request/s correctly.
   
    NP can not continue to break the law simply because they want to
    conceal embarrassing information from the public.
   
    Have you, NP spoke to ICO or contacted them about above? If not you
    may want to do so.
   
    Yours faithfully
   
    Martin McGartland
   
    www.martinmcgartland.co.uk - Highlighting very serious corruption
    within Northumbria Police HQ
   
   

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Northumbria Police

 Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 110/13 - Complaints
Provision of information held by Northumbria Police made under the Freedom
of Information Act 2000 (the 'Act')

Thank you for your email dated 2nd February 2013 in which you made a
request for access to certain information which may be held by Northumbria
Police.

As you may be aware the purpose of the Act is to allow a general right of
access to information held by a Public Authority (including the Police),
subject to certain limitations and exemptions.
 
You asked:

A report by the Government's Home Affairs Committee has highlighted
failings in the way Northumbria Police deals with complaints. The
report revealed that when it came to appeals against the  Northumbria
Force's handling of specific complaints against it, the IPCC had ruled the
force had made the wrong decision in 53% of cases.
 It is also reported that;
 Errors in the decision about whether to record a complaint are
particularly deleterious, as they give the complainant the impression from
the outset that a case is not being taken seriously, or even that the
force is trying to cover up misconduct
     
     – House of Commons Home Affairs Committee
     
   
 http://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/story/...
 
     http://tyneandwear.sky.com/news/article/...

I am requesting all recorded information Northumbria Police hold
concerning following;
     
     1. Details of Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson Salary for
2010-2011 and 2011-2012. Please also supply full details of all/any
bonuses, allowances and or any other type of payments paid during above
dates. Please also explain why such payments were paid.
 
     2. Given the seriousness of the report and also the public interest
in same, I'm requesting all recorded information held concerning any
action taken and or planed against Detective Chief Superintendent Chris
Thomson and or his Professional Standards Department resulting from the
report and it's findings. I am referring to action taken (or planed) by
Northumbria Police and or any other third parties.
     
     3. Copies of all recorded information (letters, emails etc) between
Northumbria Police and the Government's Home Affairs Committee, those
which relate and are connected to this matter, report.
     
     4. Copies of all recorded information (letters, emails etc) between
Northumbria Police and Vera Baird, police and crime commissioner,
     those which relate and are connected to this matter, report.
     
     5. Copies of all recorded information concerning what action
Northumbria Police has taken and or action planed by them to dealt with
the report, it's findings and to deal with the very serious failings by
both Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson and his Professional
Standards Department.
     
     6. All recorded information held concerning any type of disciplinary
action taken or planed against Detective Chief Superintendent Chris
Thomson following the report, its findings as well as his failings.

In response:

I have now had the opportunity to fully consider your request and I
provide a response for your attention.

Following receipt of your request, searches were conducted with the
Professional Standards Department and the Command Team of Northumbria
Police.  I can confirm that some of the information you have requested is
held by Northumbria Police.

I have today decided to disclose the located information to you as
follows:-

1. With regards to Police officers pay:

As the information you have requested is accessible by other means I have
not provided you with a copy of the information and will rely on Section
21 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.  You should therefore consider
this a refusal of this part of your request.

I have provided an explanation to this exemption below.

Section 21 (1) - Information accessible by other means

Information which is reasonably accessible to the applicant is exempt
information.
Police officer pay is published and therefore in the public domain and
freely available.
The below link provides a response to this part of your request.

http://www.police-information.co.uk/poli...

With regard to any bonus that may or may not have been paid, Northumbria
Police would not disclose if any payments were made to individual Chief
Superintendents. Such information would be classed as the personal data of
that Chief Superintendent. By withholding this information I will rely on
the following exemption -

Section 40 - Personal Information

(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.

Section 40 is a classed based, absolute exemption and therefore there is
no need to explain the public interest considerations in this area.

You should consider this to be a refusal of this part of your request
under section 17 of the Act.

2. and 3. There is no recorded information held in relation to these parts
of your request.

4. The Police and Crime Commissioner prepared the following Media
Statement on this subject:-

Northumbria Police and the HASC Report on the IPCC: Response by Vera Baird
QC Police and Crime Commissioner for Northumbria

This report by Parliamentarians shows that the Independent Police
Complaints Commission is over-worked and under-resourced for its role, not
only in terms of cash and investigators but also because its powers are
too limited. It recommends that fewer investigations are conducted by the
IPCC using police officers themselves, which is highly desirable and that
its powers are extended to compel forces to act on the IPCC’s findings.
The IPCC jurisdiction should be extended to cover private sector
contractors like G4S, Serco, Capita in their delivery of policing
services.
It is unlikely to increase public support unless at least these steps are
taken but there are also implications in this report for us locally

Although the IPCC deals directly with the most serious cases, it is also
an appeal body to which people can resort when the local force has not
investigated their complaint satisfactorily.

The committee concludes that serious cases of alleged corruption are
under-investigated, while the Commission devotes resources to appeals on
less serious complaints which forces should have resolved themselves. This
puts a powerful obligation onto Chief Constables and Commissioners like
myself to ensure that our forces resolve complaints properly in the first
place.

However, a comparative table on the change in the number of complaints
received by each force between 2010/11 and 2011/12 shows Northumbria
increase by 12% which is the 5th largest rise nationally.

The IPCC decided that Northumbria had made the wrong initial decision in
over half of all cases (53%) the highest percentage recorded for a force.

The Chief Constable has had preliminary talks about this, since it was
raised as the report was in preparation. Failure to deal satisfactorily
with complaints in force potentially suggests it could be seen as big
organisation defensiveness which ought not to be present in an
organisation dedicated to public service. Northumbria Police is a
successful force overall and I am clear that she is determined to be open.
We have all seen the appalling consequences of a force which puts
defending itself over serving the public and doing justice, at its worst
in the Hillsborough cover-up.

We will work in at least two immediate directions to improve complaints
response in Northumbria Police.

The public can review closed complaints files so as to see whether they
have been dealt with in a way that meets with their approval and can make
recommendations for improvement.

It seems sensible too, to ask some complainants if they would agree to
mediation, so that for instance, complaints of rudeness or high-handed
behaviour can be  resolved by a speedy apology rather than by filling out
a complicated complaint form and passing it up through several formal
steps. I do not see why non-police mediation cannot play a part in this so
that we are sure that people are not being pushed into an informal
resolution by officers who have great status and power with the public,
contrary to people’s rights

It is important that we get the right changes to restore confidence in
this area, and for that reason I will be monitoring closely how the force
deal with the IPCC report. I will work with the Chief Constable to ensure
those making a complaint can rely on the procedures in place.

5. Northumbria Police prepared the following Media Statement on this
subject:-
 
"We are constantly working to ensure that people have the confidence to
report problems and the mechanisms are in place to make sure their voices
are heard - this is a priority for us.

While there is always room for improvement, the IPCC report issued 2011/12
showed 209 allegations were recorded per thousand officers and staff, this
compares to the national average of 213.

Complaints figures in Northumbria have continued to fall and the latest
IPCC figures for April to September 2012 show that Northumbria have an
average of 49 allegations per thousands employees compared to the national
average of 115.

This is an extremely healthy position and reflects the work we do to
improve standards and maintain community confidence.

The key challenge that the IPCC report identified was the need to reduce
the number of appeals made by members of the public which were upheld by
the IPCC. This usually is as a result of members of the public being
unhappy about the way their complaint has been handled.

This is an area we have been working to improve for several months and we
welcome the comments from the Police and Crime Commissioner around the
public playing a greater role in the process.

This is something we will continue to focus on to ensure we maintain the
high levels of satisfaction and confidence people have in Northumbria
Police."

Additionally other sources of relevant information are also available from
other media releases, see below.

http://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/story/...

http://tyneandwear.sky.com/news/article/...

6. In relation to this part of your request, Northumbria Police can
neither confirm nor deny that it holds the information you requested as
the duty in s1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not
apply, by virtue of S40(5) Personal information.
       
Under the Freedom of Information Act, information that is disclosed is
released to the public as a whole and not just to the individual
applicant. As such, Northumbria Police would not wish to confirm or deny
to the public at large whether information is held about any individual.

You should consider this to be a refusal of this part of your request
under section 17 of the Act.

No inference can be taken from this refusal that the information you have
requested does or does not exist.

You may be interested to know that Northumbria Police routinely publish
information via the Disclosure Log.  The aim of the Disclosure Log is to
promote openness and transparency by voluntarily placing information into
the public arena.

The Disclosure Log contains copies of some of the information that has
been disclosed by Northumbria Police in response to requests made under
the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Whilst it is not possible to publish all responses we will endeavour to
publish those where we feel that the information disclosed is in the
public interest.

The Disclosure Log will be updated once responses have been sent to the
requester.

I have provided the relevant link below.

http://www.northumbria.police.uk/foi/dis...

The information we have supplied to you is likely to contain intellectual
property rights of Northumbria Police.  Your use of the information must
be strictly in accordance with the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988
(as amended) or such other applicable legislation.  In particular, you
must not re-use this information for any commercial purpose.

MIchael Cleugh
Data Protection & Disclosure Advisor
0191 295 6941

NORTHUMBRIA POLICE PRIVACY AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

The information contained in this message and any attachment(s) is
confidential and intended only for the attention of the named organisation
or individual to whom it is addressed.  The message may contain
information that is covered by legal, professional or other privilege.  No
mistake in transmission is intended to waive or compromise any such
privilege.  This message has been sent over public networks and the sender
cannot be held responsible for its integrity.

If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure,
copying, distribution or action taken in reliance of the information
contained herein is strictly prohibited, and is contrary to the provisions
of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act, 1988 and of the Data Protection
Act, 1998.

Any views expressed are those of the sender and, unless specifically
stated, do not necessarily represent the view of Northumbria Police.

We cannot accept any liability for any loss or damage sustained as a
result of software viruses.  It is your responsibility to carry out such
virus checking as is necessary.

If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by
e-mail at once and delete the message immediately.

For more information about Northumbria Police please visit our website -
[1]http://www.northumbria.police.uk

References

Visible links
1. http://www.northumbria.police.uk/

Martin McGartland (Ataliwyd y cyfrif)

Dear Northumbria Police,

I am requesting an Internal review on each part of my request on the grounds that;

a, You have not dealt with my request correctly nor have you dealt with my request within the law.

b, You have not released recorded information concerning payments from public funds to Chris Thomson despite him being a very senior officer and also head of PSD ...

c, You claim that recorded information I have requested is already available to the public, however, you have not supplied me with any further information nor link/s to the recorded information. I want to place on the record that I am requesting information about Chris Thomsons salary and not that of other police officers.

d, You have not supplied me with all the recorded information I requested co0ncerning contact with the media on the subject matter nor have you recorded supplied information concerning any action planed or being taken against Chris Thomson even when he/his department has been named as worst in UK when dealing with complaints.

The above are some of the main reasons why I am requesting an Internal review, however, I want to place on the record that I am requesting an Internal review on every part of my request.

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

Highlighting serious corruption within Northumbria Police HQ - www.martinmcgartland.co.uk

Gadawodd Martin McGartland (Ataliwyd y cyfrif) anodiad ()

Northumbria Police are a JOKE - one of the most corrupt forces in the UK; http://youtu.be/wSW_Ukihxwg

Gadawodd Martin McGartland (Ataliwyd y cyfrif) anodiad ()

The Great BIG Northumbria Police, HMG and MI5 cover-up - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3O0CQPSK...

Northumbria Police

We acknowledge receipt of your request for an internal review of the
response you received in relation to the above mentioned Freedom Of
Information request.

We aim to provide a response to you within 20 working days of this
acknowledgement.
Yours sincerely

Peter Storey

Disclosure Section

NORTHUMBRIA POLICE PRIVACY AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

The information contained in this message and any attachment(s) is
confidential and intended only for the attention of the named organisation
or individual to whom it is addressed.  The message may contain
information that is covered by legal, professional or other privilege.  No
mistake in transmission is intended to waive or compromise any such
privilege.  This message has been sent over public networks and the sender
cannot be held responsible for its integrity.

If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure,
copying, distribution or action taken in reliance of the information
contained herein is strictly prohibited, and is contrary to the provisions
of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act, 1988 and of the Data Protection
Act, 1998.

Any views expressed are those of the sender and, unless specifically
stated, do not necessarily represent the view of Northumbria Police.

We cannot accept any liability for any loss or damage sustained as a
result of software viruses.  It is your responsibility to carry out such
virus checking as is necessary.

If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by
e-mail at once and delete the message immediately.

For more information about Northumbria Police please visit our website -
[1]http://www.northumbria.police.uk

References

Visible links
1. http://www.northumbria.police.uk/

Northumbria Police

Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 110/13 - Complaints

Provision of information held by Northumbria Police made under the Freedom
of Information Act 2000 (the 'Act')

Thank you for your email dated 4 March 2013 in which you made a request for
an internal review of the disclosure provided in response to your request
outlined below

As you may be aware the purpose of the Act is to allow a general right of
access to information held by a Public Authority (including the Police),
subject to certain limitations and exemptions.

You asked (2 February 2013):

A report by the Government's Home Affairs Committee has highlighted
failings in the way Northumbria Police deals with complaints. The
report revealed that when it came to appeals against the Northumbria
Force's handling of specific complaints against it, the IPCC had ruled the
force had made the wrong decision in 53% of cases.
It is also reported that;
Errors in the decision about whether to record a complaint are
particularly deleterious, as they give the complainant the impression from
the outset that a case is not being taken seriously, or even that the force
is trying to cover up misconduct

– House of Commons Home Affairs Committee

http://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/story/...

http://tyneandwear.sky.com/news/article/...

I am requesting all recorded information Northumbria Police hold concerning
following;

1. Details of Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson Salary for
2010-2011 and 2011-2012. Please also supply full details of all/any
bonuses, allowances and or any other type of payments paid during above
dates. Please also explain why such payments were paid.

2. Given the seriousness of the report and also the public interest in
same, I'm requesting all recorded information held concerning any action
taken and or planed against Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson
and or his Professional Standards Department resulting from the report and
it's findings. I am referring to action taken (or planed) by Northumbria
Police and or any other third parties.

3. Copies of all recorded information (letters, emails etc) between
Northumbria Police and the Government's Home Affairs Committee, those which
relate and are connected to this matter, report.

4. Copies of all recorded information (letters, emails etc) between
Northumbria Police and Vera Baird, police and crime commissioner,
those which relate and are connected to this matter, report.

5. Copies of all recorded information concerning what action
Northumbria Police has taken and or action planed by them to dealt with the
report, it's findings and to deal with the very serious failings by both
Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson and his Professional Standards
Department.

6. All recorded information held concerning any type of disciplinary
action taken or planed against Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Thomson
following the report, its findings as well as his failings.

The response:

I have now had the opportunity to fully consider your request and I provide
a response for your attention.

Following receipt of your request, searches were conducted with the
Professional Standards Department and the Command Team of Northumbria
Police. I can confirm that some of the information you have requested is
held by Northumbria Police.

I have today decided to disclose the located information to you as
follows:-

1. With regards to Police officers pay:

As the information you have requested is accessible by other means I have
not provided you with a copy of the information and will rely on Section 21
of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. You should therefore consider this
a refusal of this part of your request.

I have provided an explanation to this exemption below.

Section 21 (1) - Information accessible by other means

Information which is reasonably accessible to the applicant is exempt
information.
Police officer pay is published and therefore in the public domain and
freely available.
The below link provides a response to this part of your request.

http://www.police-information.co.uk/poli...

With regard to any bonus that may or may not have been paid, Northumbria
Police would not disclose if any payments were made to individual Chief
Superintendents. Such information would be classed as the personal data of
that Chief Superintendent. By withholding this information I will rely on
the following exemption -

Section 40 - Personal Information

(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.

Section 40 is a classed based, absolute exemption and therefore there is no
need to explain the public interest considerations in this area.

You should consider this to be a refusal of this part of your request under
section 17 of the Act.

2. and 3. There is no recorded information held in relation to these parts
of your request.

4. The Police and Crime Commissioner prepared the following Media Statement
on this subject:-

Northumbria Police and the HASC Report on the IPCC: Response by Vera Baird
QC Police and Crime Commissioner for Northumbria

This report by Parliamentarians shows that the Independent Police
Complaints Commission is over-worked and under-resourced for its role, not
only in terms of cash and investigators but also because its powers are too
limited. It recommends that fewer investigations are conducted by the IPCC
using police officers themselves, which is highly desirable and that its
powers are extended to compel forces to act on the IPCC’s findings. The
IPCC jurisdiction should be extended to cover private sector contractors
like G4S, Serco, Capita in their delivery of policing services.
It is unlikely to increase public support unless at least these steps are
taken but there are also implications in this report for us locally

Although the IPCC deals directly with the most serious cases, it is also an
appeal body to which people can resort when the local force has not
investigated their complaint satisfactorily.

The committee concludes that serious cases of alleged corruption are
under-investigated, while the Commission devotes resources to appeals on
less serious complaints which forces should have resolved themselves. This
puts a powerful obligation onto Chief Constables and Commissioners like
myself to ensure that our forces resolve complaints properly in the first
place.

However, a comparative table on the change in the number of complaints
received by each force between 2010/11 and 2011/12 shows Northumbria
increase by 12% which is the 5th largest rise nationally.

The IPCC decided that Northumbria had made the wrong initial decision in
over half of all cases (53%) the highest percentage recorded for a force.

The Chief Constable has had preliminary talks about this, since it was
raised as the report was in preparation. Failure to deal satisfactorily
with complaints in force potentially suggests it could be seen as big
organisation defensiveness which ought not to be present in an organisation
dedicated to public service. Northumbria Police is a successful force
overall and I am clear that she is determined to be open. We have all seen
the appalling consequences of a force which puts defending itself over
serving the public and doing justice, at its worst in the Hillsborough
cover-up.

We will work in at least two immediate directions to improve complaints
response in Northumbria Police.

The public can review closed complaints files so as to see whether they
have been dealt with in a way that meets with their approval and can make
recommendations for improvement.

It seems sensible too, to ask some complainants if they would agree to
mediation, so that for instance, complaints of rudeness or high-handed
behaviour can be resolved by a speedy apology rather than by filling out a
complicated complaint form and passing it up through several formal steps.
I do not see why non-police mediation cannot play a part in this so that we
are sure that people are not being pushed into an informal resolution by
officers who have great status and power with the public, contrary to
people’s rights

It is important that we get the right changes to restore confidence in this
area, and for that reason I will be monitoring closely how the force deal
with the IPCC report. I will work with the Chief Constable to ensure those
making a complaint can rely on the procedures in place.

5. Northumbria Police prepared the following Media Statement on this
subject:-

"We are constantly working to ensure that people have the confidence to
report problems and the mechanisms are in place to make sure their voices
are heard - this is a priority for us.

While there is always room for improvement, the IPCC report issued 2011/12
showed 209 allegations were recorded per thousand officers and staff, this
compares to the national average of 213.

Complaints figures in Northumbria have continued to fall and the latest
IPCC figures for April to September 2012 show that Northumbria have an
average of 49 allegations per thousands employees compared to the national
average of 115.

This is an extremely healthy position and reflects the work we do to
improve standards and maintain community confidence.

The key challenge that the IPCC report identified was the need to reduce
the number of appeals made by members of the public which were upheld by
the IPCC. This usually is as a result of members of the public being
unhappy about the way their complaint has been handled.

This is an area we have been working to improve for several months and we
welcome the comments from the Police and Crime Commissioner around the
public playing a greater role in the process.

This is something we will continue to focus on to ensure we maintain the
high levels of satisfaction and confidence people have in Northumbria
Police."

Additionally other sources of relevant information are also available from
other media releases, see below.

http://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/story/...

http://tyneandwear.sky.com/news/article/...

6. In relation to this part of your request, Northumbria Police can neither
confirm nor deny that it holds the information you requested as the duty in
s1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply, by virtue
of S40(5) Personal information.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, information that is disclosed is
released to the public as a whole and not just to the individual applicant.
As such, Northumbria Police would not wish to confirm or deny to the public
at large whether information is held about any individual.

You should consider this to be a refusal of this part of your request under
section 17 of the Act.

No inference can be taken from this refusal that the information you have
requested does or does not exist.

Your request for review asked

'Dear Northumbria Police,

I am requesting an Internal review on each part of my request on the
grounds that;

a, You have not dealt with my request correctly nor have you dealt with my
request within the law.

b, You have not released recorded information concerning payments from
public funds to Chris Thomson despite him being a very senior officer and
also head of PSD ...

c, You claim that recorded information I have requested is already
available to the public, however, you have not supplied me with any further
information nor link/s to the recorded information. I want to place on the
record that I am requesting information about Chris Thomsons salary and not
that of other police officers.

d, You have not supplied me with all the recorded information I requested
co0ncerning contact with the media on the subject matter nor have you
recorded supplied information concerning any action planed or being taken
against Chris Thomson even when he/his department has been named as worst
in UK when dealing with complaints.

The above are some of the main reasons why I am requesting an Internal
review, however, I want to place on the record that I am requesting an
Internal review on every part of my request.'

In response

I shall address the points you raise in turn

a. You have stated that the request was not dealt with correctly nor within
the law. Unfortunately you have not stated how the request was not dealt
with correctly, you have also not stated which laws you believe have been
broken. This review can advise that this request was treated the same way
as every other request received by the Team that deal with FOI requests.
This is a tested process and the team deal with over 800 requests per year
in this manner. There is no evidence that the process for dealing with FOI
requests is not correct. Similarly, no laws appear to have been broken by
the FOI Team when dealing with this request.

b. This review acknowledges that you are correct when stating that
individual payments to individual officers have not been disclosed in
response to this request. However, as pointed out in the original response,
payments (whether awarded or not) to an individual officer would be classed
as the personal data of a third party as disclosure would clearly identify
that officer. Similarly information regarding disciplinary matters against
individual officers (or confirmation of none) is also the personal data of
that individual.

The exemption outlined in section 40 of the Act and as engaged in the
original response was therefore correctly applied. It is noted by this
review that the text from Section 40 of the Act was supplied to you in
response to your request to help clarify this point for you. To further
explain this point, this review can advise that the exemption is applicable
if disclosure would breach any of the Data Protection Principles. The ICO
guidance provides an example on this subject and explains that disclosure
of personal financial details would be unlawful. This review has attached a
link to the relevant guidance which may be useful to you:

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

This review notes that in line with Section 21 of the Act, a link was
supplied to the Home office page that gives details of officer pay. This is
freely available and can be provided without identifying individual
officers. This exemption was also correctly applied.

c. You have stated that links were not provided. This review notes that a
link was supplied to you that gives details of Officer payscales. This
review has attached this link again for your reference.
http://www.police-information.co.uk/poli...

Further links were supplied regarding press releases. These links are
attached again for your reference
http://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/story/...

http://tyneandwear.sky.com/news/article/...

Regarding the personal data of an individual officer, as per the answer to
b. above, any information that leads to the identification of an individual
officer is classed as third party personal data and therefore attracts the
exemption under section 40 of the Act. Whilst you continue to name
individual officers in requests, this exemption will continue to be
applicable. It is noted that historically you have made multiple requests
for third party personal data and despite section 40 of the Act being
thoroughly and repeatedly explained, you continue to make similar requests
for personal data. Whilst it is the duty of the public authority to aid and
assist the requestor, you may wish to consult with the office of the
Information Commissioner for further clarification on what is personal data
and why it is exempt from disclosure in response to a Freedom of
Information Act request. The Information Commissioner’s Office is the UK’s
independent authority set up to uphold information rights in the public
interest, promoting openness by public bodies and data privacy for
individuals.

d. With regards to this part of your request, I confirm that the response
provided to you regarding any information relating to disciplinary action
taken or planned against Detective Chief Superintendent Thompson was
appropriate and correct. In such cases, to confirm or deny that such
information does or does not exist would attract the Section 40 exemption
and I reiterate my comments above regarding the explanation of this
exemption.

It is noted that your request did not specifically ask for "contact with
the Media on the subject matter" it is therefore unclear which part of the
request you are referring to on this point. In the spirit of the Act, this
review can advise that the Freedom of Information Team carried out a
thorough investigation into what recorded information was held at the time
your request was received. This review can confirm that the Media Team were
consulted over what information was held at the time of the request and
they provided a suitable response (links to releases and a copy of the
statement from the Northumbria PCC). Clearly where no information is held,
none can be considered for disclosure in response to a Freedom of
Information request.

This concludes the internal review into your request under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000. I believe that Northumbria Police responded as fully
as possible and have fulfilled our requirements as per your Freedom of
Information request. If you remain dissatisfied with the outcome of this
review then it remains open to you to refer this matter to the Information
Commissioner at the following address:

The Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF

Yours sincerely

Hayley Morrison
Disclosure Manager

NORTHUMBRIA POLICE PRIVACY AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

The information contained in this message and any attachment(s) is confidential and intended only for the attention of the named organisation or individual to whom it is addressed. The message may contain information that is covered by legal, professional or other privilege. No mistake in transmission is intended to waive or compromise any such privilege. This message has been sent over public networks and the sender cannot be held responsible for its integrity.

If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or action taken in reliance of the information contained herein is strictly prohibited, and is contrary to the provisions of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act, 1988 and of the Data Protection Act, 1998.

Any views expressed are those of the sender and, unless specifically stated, do not necessarily represent the view of Northumbria Police.

We cannot accept any liability for any loss or damage sustained as a result of software viruses. It is your responsibility to carry out such virus checking as is necessary.

If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by e-mail at once and delete the message immediately.

For more information about Northumbria Police please visit our website - http://www.northumbria.police.uk

Gadawodd AnnaO anodiad ()

I agree totally with the comments and concerns in relation to not just Thomson but the entire force. I have had more complaints covered up than one can wave a stick at. Furthermore, I have been lied to had evidence disappear or be tampered with and every time I've complained good old Thomson didn't spill a drop of whitewash!!! I'm thinking about starting my own BAFTA's for corrupt officers Bad Attitude Failed To Act.