Dialogue with major motorcycle groups

Mae'r ymateb i'r cais hwn yn hwyr iawn. Yn ôl y gyfraith, ym mhob amgylchiad, dylai Westminster City Council fod wedi ymateb erbyn hyn. (manylion). Gallwch gwyno drwy yn gofyn am adolygiad mewnol.

Dear Sir or Madam,

I have downloaded the motorcycle report dated 1st October 2009 from your website (http://www3.westminster.gov.uk/newcsu/Ca...)
and have the following question regarding the consultation that was undertaken prior to introducing the motorcycle charging scheme.

In paragraph 4.6.2 on page 7, it says the following:-

"The July 2008 decision to introduce motorcycle parking charges was made after dialogue with major motorcycle groups; Motorcycle Action Group (MAG), British Motorcyclists Federations (BMF) and Motorcycle Parking".

Please can you advise how the Council made a decision to introduce parking charges for motorbikes and scooters after dialogue with the three above organisations, when each specifically advised that they were opposed to charging for motorcycle parking.

In case you dispute this, as Mr Fitsall seems to have done in his report, I include below the link to the joint letter sent to all Westminster Councillors by the BMF and MAG to say that they had not been consulted on the issue and that they remain opposed to charging for motorcycle parking. I also include below the link to the statement made by motorcycleparking.com, which clearly indicates that the consultation process was very limited and that they also remain opposed to charging for motorcycle parking.

http://www.notobikeparkingfees.com/wp-co...

http://www.motorcycleparking.com/westmin...

I look forward to receiving your response.

Yours faithfully,

Mrs Brown

Westminster City Council

Confirmation of Freedom Of Information Request

Thank you for your request for information.

Your request details have now been recorded and will be passed on to the
appropriate Divisional Records Officer for action.

This Freedom Of Information Request was based on the following
information:

Name: Mrs Brown
Address: See email address
Email: [FOI #19350 email]
Telephone:
Request Details: I have downloaded the motorcycle report dated 1st
October 2009 from
your website

and have the following question regarding the consultation that was
undertaken prior to introducing the motorcycle charging scheme.

In paragraph 4.6.2 on page 7, it says the following:-

"The July 2008 decision to introduce motorcycle parking charges was
made after dialogue with major motorcycle groups;

Please can you advise how the Council made a decision to introduce
parking charges for motorbikes and scooters after dialogue with the
three above organisations [Motorcycle Action Group (MAG), British
Motorcyclists Federations (BMF) and Motorcycle
Parking], when each specifically advised that they
were opposed to charging for motorcycle parking.

FOI Reference Number: 4454
Target Completion Date: 02/11/2009

Please do not reply to this email.
This is an automatic response to your request, and replies to this message
will not be actioned.

If you need to contact Westminster City Council regarding your request,
please contact:

mailto:[Westminster City Council request email]
Tel:020 7641 3921

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

FOI, Westminster City Council

Dear Mrs Brown,

Thank you for your email, submitted under the Freedom of Information Act
2000, whereby you requested the following:

"The July 2008 decision to introduce motorcycle parking charges was made
after dialogue with major motorcycle groups"; Please can you advise how
the Council made a decision to introduce parking charges for motorbikes
and scooters after dialogue with the three above organisations [Motorcycle
Action Group (MAG), British Motorcyclists Federations (BMF) and Motorcycle
Parking], when each specifically advised that they were opposed to
charging for motorcycle parking.

Response

Based on your request above, we believe that the basis for the decision
(i.e. the objections and the responses to such objections) is addressed in
the document you referenced above: the Cabinet Member Decision Report
dated the 1st October 2009, also the Cabinet Member Decision dated the
12th May 2009, and related appendices. These are available on the
Westminster City Council website, and I include a link here for your
convenience:

[1]http://www3.westminster.gov.uk/committee...

As this information is on our website, it is exempt from provision by
virtue of section 21, as it is reasonably accessible via other means.

In accordance with section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 this
letter acts as a Refusal Notice.

If this does not answer your query, however, please inform us specifically
what information you are seeking with regard to the above decision.

Kindest regards,

Tanya Holden
Data Protection & FOI Officer
Knowledge and Information Management
Westminster City Council
101 Orchardson Street
London, NW8 8EA
Tel: 0207 641 6451
Fax: 0207 641 2872
Email: [Westminster City Council request email]
[2]www.westminster.gov.uk

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

References

Visible links
1. http://www3.westminster.gov.uk/committee...
2. file://www.westminster.gov.uk

Dear FOI,

Thank you for your response.

Let me reword my request so that it may now comply with your interpretation of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Please provide copies of ALL correspondence (emails, letters etc), minutes of meetings and "dialogue" (to use the term mentioned in Mr Fitsall's latest motorcycle report) with EACH of the major motorcycle groups.

Basically, I am asking for back-up documentation held by the council that can justify the statement made by Mr Fitsall in his latest motorcycle report: "The July 2008 decision to introduce motorcycle parking charges was made after dialogue with major motorcycle groups".

Yours sincerely,

Mrs Brown

Westminster City Council

Confirmation of Freedom Of Information Request

Thank you for your request for information.

Your request details have now been recorded and will be passed on to the
appropriate Divisional Records Officer for action.

This Freedom Of Information Request was based on the following
information:

Name: Mrs Brown
Address: see email address
Email: [FOI #19350 email]
Telephone:
Request Details: Please provide copies of ALL correspondence (emails,
letters etc), minutes of meetings and "dialogue" (to use the term
mentioned in Mr Fitsall's latest motorcycle report) with EACH of the major
motorcycle groups.

Basically, I am asking for back-up documentation held by the council that
can justify the statement made by Mr Fitsall in his latest motorcycle
report: "The July 2008 decision to introduce motorcycle parking charges
was made after dialogue with major motorcycle groups"

FOI Reference Number: 4526
Target Completion Date: 16/11/2009

Please do not reply to this email.
This is an automatic response to your request, and replies to this message
will not be actioned.

If you need to contact Westminster City Council regarding your request,
please contact:

mailto:[Westminster City Council request email]
Tel:020 7641 3921

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

FOI, Westminster City Council

1 Atodiad

Dear Mrs Brown,

Please find attached our response to your recent requests submitted under
the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

<<Aggregated Fees Letter - Mrs Brown FOI 4453 4455 4456 4474 4526.doc>>

Yours sincerely,

Tanya Holden
Data Protection & FOI Officer
Knowledge and Information Management
Westminster City Council
101 Orchardson Street
London, NW8 8EA
Tel: 0207 641 6451
Fax: 0207 641 2872
Email: [Westminster City Council request email]
[1]www.westminster.gov.uk

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

References

Visible links
1. file://www.westminster.gov.uk

Dear Ms Holden,

Thank you for your response.

I am very sorry but I do not accept your explanation for not processing my FOI requests.

The FOI requests you are referring to in your response are as follows:-

FOI 4455 - Security Devices for motorcycles
FOI 4453 - Parking cards usage
FOI 4456 - Verrus parking pay by phone uptime
FOI 4474 - Tender process re pay by phone system
FOI 4526 - Dialogue with major motorcycle groups

As you must be very well aware, the FOI Act 2000, section 5 (2) allows a public authority to aggregate the cost of providing the information requested through multiple FOIs submitted by the same person, as long as the FOIs in question "relate, to any extent, to the same or similar information".

I am very sorry to say that I can't see how the above FOIs relate to the same or similar information.

FOI 4455 is about security devices for motorcycles, please let me know which one of the other 4 FOIs relate to security devices for motorcycles.

FOI 4453 is about parking cards, please let me know which one of the other 4 FOIs relate to parking cards.

FOI 4456 is about the Verrus pay by phone system uptime that is mentioned in the latest motorcycle report. Mr Fitsall seems to quote a number in his report and all I am asking for is supporting documentation for the data quoted by Mr Fitsall. How is this related to any of my other FOIs?

FOI 4474 is about the tender process re the Verrus pay by phone system. How has this to do with parking cards, system uptime, security devices and dialogue with motorcycle groups (see below)?

FOI 4526 is about the dialogue that the City Council has been having with major motorcycle groups, as stated in Mr Fitsall's latest motorcycle report. Has this got anything to do with security devices, Verrus and parking cards?

I consider your response as quite vexatious to be honest, as it is unacceptable to incorrectly use the regulations set out within the FOI Act 2000 in an attempt to try and avoid answering requests from the public.

Therefore, would you please answer each of my FOI requests as, I repeat, they do not relate to the same or similar information, as defined in section 5 (2) of the FOI Act 2000.

If you continue to refuse to reply to my FOI requests, I may raise an official complaint to the Information Commissioner AND District Auditor for what, I believe, is a mis-use of the FOI Act 2000 on your part, in an attempt to avoid answering FOI requests and failing to make information available to members of the public that they are entirely entitled to see.

Yours sincerely,

Mrs Brown

Dear Tanya,

Following my note of yesterday, I would also like to add that I have not submitted 10 requests in the last 60 days. I have submitted less than that, so please get your facts right before coming up with false excuses to avoid answering FOIs and reduce your workload.

This is another thing I will mention to the ICO and District Auditor should you continue to refuse to answer my FOI requests.

Yours faithfully,

Mrs Brown

Dear Sir or Madam,

Please would you reply to my emails dated 29th and 30th October 2009 with regards to the above FOI.

It is not appropriate to aggregate my FOIs as they are not related, and also I have NOT submitted 10 requests in the last 60 days, so please reply at your earliest convenience.

Yours faithfully,

Mrs Brown

Preston, Catherine, Westminster City Council

1 Atodiad

Dear Mrs Brown

Please find attached a copy of the Councils response to your request for
internal review

Yours sincerely

Catherine Preston
Knowledge and Information Management Team
Information Services
Westminster City Council
101 Orchardson Street
London NW8 8EA
Tel: 020 7641 3332
Fax: 020 7641 2872
Email: [email address]

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Ms Preston,

Now that the time limit for aggregating my FOIs has passed (it was 14th December 2009 per your internal review response), please would you answer the question set in this FOI. If you still refuse to answer, please provide an explanation for your refusal quoting and referring to the FOI Act 2000.

Yours sincerely,

Mrs Brown

Preston, Catherine, Westminster City Council

I am now out of the office until Tuesday 29th December 2009. I shall
respond to your email upon my return. If your request is urgent, please
write to either [email address] or
[Westminster City Council request email]

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir