Direct Care Payments Fraud and Convictions - An Update

Mr Hussain made this Freedom of Information request to Bradford City Council Automatic anti-spam measures are in place for this older request. Please let us know if a further response is expected or if you are having trouble responding.

The request was refused by Bradford City Council.

Dear Bradford City Council,

On the 14th of November 2018, a user by the name of Andy Peacher made the following request via the WhatDoTheyKnow website :

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/d...

On the 27th of December 2018, you had responded to the questions put to you.

I would now like to put to the Council the very same questions once again but to shift the time range of the enquiry period, in order to update this enquiry.

Q1. How many times has a resident of the L.A been done for fraud against them and fined or jailed covering the period from December 2018 until May 2023. This relates to direct care payments.

Q2. How many of these was safeguarding relatives like the mental health act does under a section. or when the officce of the public guardian takes power.

Q3. Do you have numbers of fraud cases where the accused have never spent the money.

Yours faithfully,

Mr Hussain

Freedom of Information, Bradford City Council

Thank you for contacting the City of Bradford Metropolitan District
Council Corporate Information Governance Team.  We confirm that we have
received your correspondence.

 

If you have submitted a Freedom of Information or Environmental
Information Regulation request – we will respond to your request in
accordance with the appropriate legislation (20 working days). 

 

If we require further information from you before we process your request,
we will contact you directly to ask for this. 

 

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council is registered with the
Information Commissioners Office (ICO) under the provisions of the Data
Protection Act 2018.  If you would like further information please click
on the following link: [1]Privacy notice | Bradford Council

                                              

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE – PLEASE DO NOT REPLY

 

This email, and any attachments, may contain Protected or Restricted
information and is intended solely for the individual to whom it is
addressed. It may contain sensitive or protectively marked material and
should be handled accordingly. If this email has been misdirected, please
notify the author immediately. If you are not the intended recipient you
must not disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on any of the
information contained in it or attached, and all copies must be deleted
immediately. Whilst we take reasonable steps to try to identify any
software viruses, any attachments to this email may nevertheless contain
viruses which our anti-virus software has failed to identify. You should
therefore carry out your own anti-virus checks before opening any
documents. Bradford Council will not accept any liability for damage
caused by computer viruses emanating from any attachment or other document
supplied with this email. Emails may be subject to recording and / or
monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

References

Visible links
1. https://www.bradford.gov.uk/privacy-noti...

Freedom of Information, Bradford City Council

Dear Mr Hussain

 

I refer to your request dated 7 May 2023 under the Freedom of Information
Act asking to supply the following information:

 

I would now like to put to the Council the very same questions once again
but to shift the time range of the enquiry period, in order to update this
enquiry.

Q1. How many times has a resident of the L.A been done for fraud against
them and fined or jailed covering the period from December 2018 until May
2023. This relates to direct care payments.

 

Response: zero

Q2. How many of these was safeguarding relatives like the mental health
act does under a section. or when the office of the public guardian takes
power.
 

Response: zero

Q3. Do you have numbers of fraud cases where the accused have never spent
the money.

 

Response: zero

 

In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, if you are not
satisfied with the reply to your request you can ask for an internal
review.

 

A request for an internal review must be submitted within 40 working days
in writing to the Corporate Information Governance Team, City of Bradford
Metropolitan District Council, City Hall, Centenary Square, Bradford, BD1
1HY or by emailing [Bradford City Council request email].

 

If you are still not satisfied with the outcome of the internal review you
have the right of appeal to the Information Commissioner who can be
contacted at:

 

Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow,
Cheshire, SK9 5AF. Tel: 0303 123 1113 URL: www.ico.org.uk

 

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council is registered with the
Information Commissioners Office (ICO) under the provisions of the Data
Protection Act 2018. The Council takes its responsibilities under the Act
very seriously. 

 

To find out more on how we handle your information, please click on the
following link: https://www.bradford.gov.uk/privacy-notice

 

Regards

 

Siama Kausar

Information Governance Officer

Finance, IT & Procurement Service

Telephone Number: 01274 434506

 

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council

Department of Corporate Resources

City Hall, Centenary Square, Bradford, BD1 1HY

 

This email, and any attachments, may contain Protected or Restricted
information and is intended solely for the individual to whom it is
addressed. It may contain sensitive or protectively marked material and
should be handled accordingly. If this email has been misdirected, please
notify the author immediately. If you are not the intended recipient you
must not disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on any of the
information contained in it or attached, and all copies must be deleted
immediately. Whilst we take reasonable steps to try to identify any
software viruses, any attachments to this email may nevertheless contain
viruses which our anti-virus software has failed to identify. You should
therefore carry out your own anti-virus checks before opening any
documents. Bradford Council will not accept any liability for damage
caused by computer viruses emanating from any attachment or other document
supplied with this email. Emails may be subject to recording and/or
monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

From: Mr Hussain <[FOI #978658 email]>

To: Freedom of Information <[email address]>

Date: 07/05/2023 00:37:07

Subject: Freedom of Information request - Direct Care Payments Fraud and
Convictions - An Update

 

CAUTION: This email has originated from outside Bradford Council. 

Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and
know the content is safe.

 

 

Dear Bradford City Council,

 

On the 14th of November 2018, a user by the name of Andy Peacher made the
following request via the WhatDoTheyKnow website :

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/d...

 

On the 27th of December 2018, you had responded to the questions put to
you.

 

I would now like to put to the Council the very same questions once again
but to shift the time range of the enquiry period, in order to update this
enquiry.

 

Q1. How many times has a resident of the L.A been done for fraud against
them and fined or jailed covering the period from December 2018 until May
2023.  This relates to direct care payments.

 

Q2. How many of these was safeguarding relatives like the mental health
act does under a section. or when the officce of the public guardian takes
power.

 

Q3. Do you have numbers of fraud cases where the accused have never spent
the money.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

Mr Hussain

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:

[FOI #978658 email]

 

Is [Bradford City Council request email] the wrong address for Freedom of Information
requests to Bradford City Council? If so, please contact us using this
form:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/change_re...

 

Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/offi...

 

For more detailed guidance on safely disclosing information, read the
latest advice from the ICO:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...

 

Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will
be delayed.

 

If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web
manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

 

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Freedom of Information,

Thank you for your reply.

Please can you kindly confirm in the affirmative that over the last decade or so, from 2012 onwards, you have only ever had one case which has met the criteria of the FOI questions asked of you and resulted in a criminal conviction?

Yours sincerely,

Mr Hussain

Freedom of Information, Bradford City Council

Thank you for contacting the City of Bradford Metropolitan District
Council Corporate Information Governance Team.  We confirm that we have
received your correspondence.

 

If you have submitted a Freedom of Information or Environmental
Information Regulation request – we will respond to your request in
accordance with the appropriate legislation (20 working days). 

 

If we require further information from you before we process your request,
we will contact you directly to ask for this. 

 

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council is registered with the
Information Commissioners Office (ICO) under the provisions of the Data
Protection Act 2018.  If you would like further information please click
on the following link: [1]Privacy notice | Bradford Council

                                              

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE – PLEASE DO NOT REPLY

 

This email, and any attachments, may contain Protected or Restricted
information and is intended solely for the individual to whom it is
addressed. It may contain sensitive or protectively marked material and
should be handled accordingly. If this email has been misdirected, please
notify the author immediately. If you are not the intended recipient you
must not disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on any of the
information contained in it or attached, and all copies must be deleted
immediately. Whilst we take reasonable steps to try to identify any
software viruses, any attachments to this email may nevertheless contain
viruses which our anti-virus software has failed to identify. You should
therefore carry out your own anti-virus checks before opening any
documents. Bradford Council will not accept any liability for damage
caused by computer viruses emanating from any attachment or other document
supplied with this email. Emails may be subject to recording and / or
monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

References

Visible links
1. https://www.bradford.gov.uk/privacy-noti...

Freedom of Information, Bradford City Council

Dear Mr Hussain

 

I refer to your request dated 26th May 2023 under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.

 

To enable me to proceed with your request, I will require further details
in order to identify and locate all the requested information. In order to
help us to provide the information required, please could you clarify the
following:

 

In relation to question 2 of your previous request with reference 9677,
please can you clarify exactly what you mean and exactly what you are
asking. Clarification of this question will enable us to provide a
response to your latest request with reference 9976.

 

Q2. How many of these was safeguarding relatives like the mental health
act does under a section. or when the office of the public guardian takes
power.
 

The Council has suspended your request until we receive your clarification
response and the 20 working days to respond will commence upon receipt of
your reply.

 

If we do not hear from you within one month, we will assume that you no
longer require the information and this request will be closed.

 

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council is registered with the
Information Commissioners Office (ICO) under the provisions of the Data
Protection Act 2018. The Council takes its responsibilities under the Act
very seriously. 

 

To find out more on how we handle your information, please click on the
following link: https://www.bradford.gov.uk/privacy-notice

 

Regards

 

Amanda Lyth

Senior Information Governance Officer

Finance, IT & Procurement Service

Telephone Number: 01274 434506

 

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council

Department of Corporate Resources

City Hall, Centenary Square, Bradford, BD1 1HY

 

This email, and any attachments, may contain Protected or Restricted
information and is intended solely for the individual to whom it is
addressed. It may contain sensitive or protectively marked material and
should be handled accordingly. If this email has been misdirected, please
notify the author immediately. If you are not the intended recipient you
must not disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on any of the
information contained in it or attached, and all copies must be deleted
immediately. Whilst we take reasonable steps to try to identify any
software viruses, any attachments to this email may nevertheless contain
viruses which our anti-virus software has failed to identify. You should
therefore carry out your own anti-virus checks before opening any
documents. Bradford Council will not accept any liability for damage
caused by computer viruses emanating from any attachment or other document
supplied with this email. Emails may be subject to recording and/or
monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

Dear Freedom of Information,

The original questions where asked of you on 14th of November 2018 by a different requester and a response to the questions were provided by you on the 27th of December 2018.

The same questions where then put to you by me on the 4th of May 2023, simply changing the request by shifting the timeframe and you fully responded to by the 24th of May 2023.

The answers have been provided but I just needed this to be confirmed to be correct of the full scope of the time frame of 2012 to 2023 encompassing both requests.

As you have sort further clarity I would like to extended the timeframe further back to commence from 2017 to the present. So I need you to confirm that the following updated enquiry is correct:

Q1. How many times has a resident of the L.A been done for fraud against them and fined or jailed covering the period from 15 January 2007 (the date the Fruad Act 2006 became law) until end of May 2023. This relates to direct care payments.
 
Is your revised response now: One?

Q2. How many of these was safeguarding relatives like the mental health act does under a section or when the office of the public guardian takes power.
 
Is your revised response now: One?

Q3. Do you have numbers of fraud cases where the accused have never spent the money.
 
Is you revised response now: One?

Yours sincerely,

Mr Hussain

Freedom of Information, Bradford City Council

Thank you for contacting the City of Bradford Metropolitan District
Council Corporate Information Governance Team.  We confirm that we have
received your correspondence.

 

If you have submitted a Freedom of Information or Environmental
Information Regulation request – we will respond to your request in
accordance with the appropriate legislation (20 working days). 

 

If we require further information from you before we process your request,
we will contact you directly to ask for this. 

 

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council is registered with the
Information Commissioners Office (ICO) under the provisions of the Data
Protection Act 2018.  If you would like further information please click
on the following link: [1]Privacy notice | Bradford Council

                                              

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE – PLEASE DO NOT REPLY

 

This email, and any attachments, may contain Protected or Restricted
information and is intended solely for the individual to whom it is
addressed. It may contain sensitive or protectively marked material and
should be handled accordingly. If this email has been misdirected, please
notify the author immediately. If you are not the intended recipient you
must not disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on any of the
information contained in it or attached, and all copies must be deleted
immediately. Whilst we take reasonable steps to try to identify any
software viruses, any attachments to this email may nevertheless contain
viruses which our anti-virus software has failed to identify. You should
therefore carry out your own anti-virus checks before opening any
documents. Bradford Council will not accept any liability for damage
caused by computer viruses emanating from any attachment or other document
supplied with this email. Emails may be subject to recording and / or
monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

References

Visible links
1. https://www.bradford.gov.uk/privacy-noti...

Alex Hoyle, Bradford City Council

2 Attachments

Dear Mr Hussain,

 

I refer to your request following clarification dated 9 June 2023 under
the Freedom of Information Act asking to supply the following information:

 

“The original questions were asked of you on 14th of November 2018 by a
different requester and a response to the questions were provided by you
on the 27th of December 2018.

 

The same questions where then put to you by me on the 4th of May 2023,
simply changing the request by shifting the timeframe and you fully
responded to by the 24th of May 2023.

 

The answers have been provided but I just needed this to be confirmed to
be correct of the full scope of the time frame of 2012 to 2023
encompassing both requests.

 

As you have sort further clarity I would like to extended the timeframe
further back to commence from 2017 to the present. So I need you to
confirm that the following updated enquiry is correct:

 

Q1. How many times has a resident of the L.A been done for fraud against
them and fined or jailed covering the period from 15 January 2007 (the
date the Fraud Act 2006 became law) until end of May 2023. This relates to
direct care payments.

  

Q2. How many of these was safeguarding relatives like the mental health
act does under a section or when the office of the public guardian takes
power.

  

Q3. Do you have numbers of fraud cases where the accused have never spent
the money?”

 

 

The Council’s response is set out below:

 

Question 1. How many times has a resident of the L.A been done for fraud
against them and fined or jailed covering the period from 15 January 2007
(the date the Fraud Act 2006 became law) until end of May 2023. This
relates to direct care payments.

 

Answer 1. 1

  

Question 2. How many of these was safeguarding relatives like the mental
health act does under a section or when the office of the public guardian
takes power.

 

Answer 2. 1

 

Question 3. Do you have numbers of fraud cases where the accused have
never spent the money?

 

Answer 3. Your request for information has been considered by the Council
under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. I can confirm that the
information requested is not held by Bradford Council and therefore, this
response acts as a refusal notice under section 17(1) of the Freedom of
Information Act in accordance with section 1(1)(a) of the Act.

 

In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, if you are not
satisfied with the reply to your request, you can ask for an internal
review.

 

A request for an internal review must be submitted within 40 working days
in writing to the Corporate Information Governance Team, City of Bradford
Metropolitan District Council, City Hall, Centenary Square, Bradford, BD1
1HY or by emailing [1][Bradford City Council request email].

 

If you are still not satisfied with the outcome of the internal review,
you have the right of appeal to the Information Commissioner who can be
contacted at:

 

Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow,
Cheshire, SK9 5AF. Tel: 0303 123 1113 URL: [2]www.ico.org.uk.

 

Kind regards

 

 

Alex Hoyle

Senior Corporate Investigator

Corporate Investigations

Finance, IT & Procurement Service

 

Room 420, City Hall, Bradford, BD1 1HY

 

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council

Department of Corporate Resources

 

[3]BD25_Logo_signature                        

Bradford District is the UK City of Culture 2025

#CityOfCulture2025 | #Bradford2025 | [4]bradford2025.co.uk

 

 

This email, and any attachments, may contain Protected or Restricted
information and is intended solely for the individual to whom it is
addressed. It may contain sensitive or protectively marked material and
should be handled accordingly. If this email has been misdirected, please
notify the author immediately. If you are not the intended recipient you
must not disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on any of the
information contained in it or attached, and all copies must be deleted
immediately. Whilst we take reasonable steps to try to identify any
software viruses, any attachments to this email may nevertheless contain
viruses which our anti-virus software has failed to identify. You should
therefore carry out your own anti-virus checks before opening any
documents. Bradford Council will not accept any liability for damage
caused by computer viruses emanating from any attachment or other document
supplied with this email. Emails may be subject to recording and / or
monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[Bradford City Council request email]
2. http://www.ico.org.uk/
4. https://bradford2025.co.uk/

Dear Bradford City Council,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Bradford City Council's handling of my FOI request 'Direct Care Payments Fraud and Convictions - An Update'.

I am satisfied that you have fully addressed and responded to both my first and second questions with your answers of "one" to the question of 1."How many times has a resident of the L.A been done for fraud against them and fined or jailed covering the period from 15 January 2007(the date the Fraud Act 2006 became law) until end of May 2023. This relates to direct care payments." and 2."How many of these was safeguarding relatives like the mental health act does under a section or when the office of the public guardian takes power".

As your answer to both these questions is "one", I am satisfied that these questions has been fully addressed and responded to, to my satisfaction.

However, you have previously addressed and responded to the third question, namely 3."Do you have numbers of fraud cases where the accused have never spent the money?”, as on both the 27th of December 2018 you had stated "one" which covered the period 2012 to 2018 and then you had stated on the 24th of May 2023, "zero" for the period 2018 to 2023. So in both your previous responses, you have fully addressed this question but know when I look to further extend it to cover the period from January 2007 to 2012, which has not been previously covered, you state you do not hold this information covering the period January 2007 to May 2023. This seems very illogical and makes no sense, in the context that information had previously been partially provided covering the years 2012 to 2023. So how can you now state you do not hold this information? Unless I am mistaken you seem to be contradicting yourself

Please can you reevaluate your response to question three and confirm your answer is still "one" as I anticipate. I believe you may have made an error in applying this exemption given partial information has previously been provided.

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

Yours faithfully,

Mr Hussain

Freedom of Information, Bradford City Council

Thank you for contacting the City of Bradford Metropolitan District
Council Corporate Information Governance Team.  We confirm that we have
received your correspondence.

 

If you have submitted a Freedom of Information or Environmental
Information Regulation request – we will respond to your request in
accordance with the appropriate legislation (20 working days). 

 

If we require further information from you before we process your request,
we will contact you directly to ask for this. 

 

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council is registered with the
Information Commissioners Office (ICO) under the provisions of the Data
Protection Act 2018.  If you would like further information please click
on the following link: [1]Privacy notice | Bradford Council

                                              

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE – PLEASE DO NOT REPLY

 

This email, and any attachments, may contain Protected or Restricted
information and is intended solely for the individual to whom it is
addressed. It may contain sensitive or protectively marked material and
should be handled accordingly. If this email has been misdirected, please
notify the author immediately. If you are not the intended recipient you
must not disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on any of the
information contained in it or attached, and all copies must be deleted
immediately. Whilst we take reasonable steps to try to identify any
software viruses, any attachments to this email may nevertheless contain
viruses which our anti-virus software has failed to identify. You should
therefore carry out your own anti-virus checks before opening any
documents. Bradford Council will not accept any liability for damage
caused by computer viruses emanating from any attachment or other document
supplied with this email. Emails may be subject to recording and / or
monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

 

References

Visible links
1. https://www.bradford.gov.uk/privacy-noti...

Harry Singh, Bradford City Council

2 Attachments

Dear Mr Hussain,

 

Thank you for your email dated 13 June 2023 in relation to case reference
9976, requesting an internal review of the decision made under the Freedom
of Information Act 2000.

 

“I am writing to request an internal review of Bradford City Council's
handling of my FOI request 'Direct Care Payments Fraud and Convictions -
An Update'. I am satisfied that you have fully addressed and responded to
both my first and second questions with your answers of "one" to the
question of 1 and 2. However, you have previously addressed and responded
to the third question, namely 3."Do you have numbers of fraud cases where
the accused have never spent the money? as on both the 27th of December
2018 you had stated "one" which covered the period 2012 to 2018 and then
you had stated on the 24th of May 2023, "zero" for the period 2018 to
2023. So in both your previous responses, you have fully addressed this
question but know when I look to further extend it to cover the period
from January 2007 to 2012, which has not been previously covered, you
state you do not hold this information covering the period January 2007 to
May 2023.  This seems very illogical and makes no sense, in the context
that information had previously been partially provided covering the years
2012 to 2023. So how can you now state you do not hold this information?
Unless I am mistaken you seem to be contradicting yourself.  Please can
you re-evaluate your response to question three and confirm your answer is
still "one" as I anticipate. I believe you may have made an error in
applying this exemption given partial information has previously been
provided.”

 

The Council’s response is as follows:

 

I have considered the case presented to me and having reviewed the
information provided to all three Freedom of Information requests received
by the authority, I can confirm the following:

 

 1. The response issued in December 2018 (case reference FOI-Nov72), in
relation to the question;“Do you have numbers of fraud cases where the
accused have never spent the money?” was incorrect.

 

As the Council are unable to ratify that the money was NEVER spent, this
response should have stated that the information requested, is not held by
Bradford Council and the request refused in accordance with Section
1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act.  The Council apologies for this
inaccuracy.

 

 2. The response issued in May 2023 (case reference 9677), to the same
question; “Do you have numbers of fraud cases where the accused have
never spent the money?”, was incorrect again.

 

This was due to the fact, that as the answer to question 1 of the same
request was zero, therefore the answers to both subsequent questions 2 & 3
should have been stated as “not applicable” and not “zero”.  The Council
apologies for this inaccuracy.

 

 3. In response to your review request, I am satisfied that in response to
question 3 of your request (FOI case reference 9976); “Do you have
numbers of fraud cases where the accused have never spent the money?”
that this information is not held by Bradford Council and that the
Councils response dated 13 June 2023 was correctly provided and the
refusal notice issued under Section 17(1) of the Freedom of
Information Act in accordance with Section 1(1)(a) of the Act.

 

If you are not satisfied with the outcome of this internal review you have
the right of appeal to the Information Commissioner who can be contacted
at: Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane,
Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF. Tel: 0303 123 1113. URL: [1]www.ico.org.uk. 

 

Kind regards

 

Harry Singh

Corporate Investigations, Information Governance & Complaints

City Hall, Centenary Square, Bradford BD1 1HY

 

City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council

Corporate Resources

 

     

 

Bradford District is the UK City of Culture 2025

#CityOfCulture2025 | #Bradford2025 | [2]bradford2025.co.uk

 

 

This email, and any attachments, may contain Protected or Restricted
information and is intended solely for the individual to whom it is
addressed. It may contain sensitive or protectively marked material and
should be handled accordingly. If this email has been misdirected, please
notify the author immediately. If you are not the intended recipient you
must not disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on any of the
information contained in it or attached, and all copies must be deleted
immediately. Whilst we take reasonable steps to try to identify any
software viruses, any attachments to this email may nevertheless contain
viruses which our anti-virus software has failed to identify. You should
therefore carry out your own anti-virus checks before opening any
documents. Bradford Council will not accept any liability for damage
caused by computer viruses emanating from any attachment or other document
supplied with this email. Emails may be subject to recording and / or
monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.

 

References

Visible links
1. http://www.ico.org.uk/
2. https://bradford2025.co.uk/

Mr Hussain left an annotation ()

Dear ICO - Paula Flanagan,

I write to lodge a new complaint to yourself as the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) regarding the City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council's (CBMDC) handling of my FOI request via the WhatDoTheyKnow website. See the following :

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/d...

At first, they (CBMDC) fully provide the information requested by a different user in December 2018. This very same FOI is revised over 4 years later on the 7th of May 2023, to get an update by adjusting the timeframe, and once against the FOI is fully responded to by the 24th May 2023. Case closed, the matter is over with, as both FOI of 2018 and 2023 have been fully responded to.

Myself, not being satisfied with the "format" of the disclosure response; on the 26th of May 2023, I simply looked to seek clarity by connecting both the 2018 and 2023 FOI's to have the FOI disclosures confirmed as complete, consistent and comprehensive encompassing both FOI request time periods in a singular reply format, given the latest information provided by the LA.

On the 8th of June 2023, the LA seeks further clarity to an answer to Q2 which they have previously fully addressed on two previous occasions both in December 2018 and May 2023 without seeking further clarity to this question. This is plainly ridiculous, absurd and nonsensical.

On the 9th of June 2023, I take this opportunity to expand the scope of the original FOI time range to cover the period of January 2007 to May 2023, having previously received the response for the time range of 2012 to 2018 by the LA's response to the original FOI disclosure made on December 2018, covering the time range of 2018 to 2023 by the second updated disclosure made of May 2023.

A few days later on the 13th of June 2023, the LA responds to both Q1 & Q2 in the affirmative as they have previously done and their response is consistent with previous disclosures, as anticipated. So their request seeking further clarity of Q2 on the 8th of June 2023, was simply disingenuous as they have subsequently provided this information by fully responding to Q2 by the 13th of June 2023. However, this time they state they do not hold information to Q3, when on both the previous two occasions, in December 2018 and then again in May 2023, this question has been fully addressed without issue.

On this day, the 13th of June 2023, I ask for an internal review given the changing and inconsistent responses.

On the 16th of June 2023, the response received by the LA simply defies disbelief. They now seem to be suggesting that their December 2018, response to Q3, was wrong. If that was the case then why was this not picked up by the LA in their response of May 2023, having been afforded the opportunity to revisit this FOI, albeit with an updated timeline? Why was this not picked up by the LA on the 8th of June 2023 when they had disingenuously sorted clarity to Q2, not Q3?

After I had instigated an internal review regarding Q3, the response received by the LA on the 16th of June 2023 now states the following :

[3. In response to your review request, I am satisfied that in response to question 3 of your request (FOI case reference 9976); “Do you have numbers of fraud cases where the accused have never spent the money?” that this information is not held by Bradford Council and that the
Councils response dated 13 June 2023 was correctly provided and the
refusal notice issued under Section 17(1) of the Freedom of Information Act in accordance with Section 1(1)(a) of the Act]

This present position is completely inconsistent with the LA's position prior to the 13th of June 2023 and from 27th of December 2018. If the LA now look to revise its position regarding Q3, upon my further enquires and expanded FOI requests, then please can the Information Commissioner investigate and look to uphold my complaint that the LA CBMDC have provided false information in response to an FOI request published on a public platform in response to the Q3 of the FOI since 27 December 2018 to 12 of June 2023, and have failed to rectify this "error or mistake" and therefore have been negligent to their responsibility and obligation under the Freedom of Information Act legislation, thus eroding public confidence in the information the Local Authority CBMDC supplies as responses to FOI requests.

Going forward, how can the Public have any confidence and rely on the information supplied by LA will be consistent and remain the same after the passage of time? I would like the Information Commissioner to uphold my complaint that the Local Authority (LA), City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (CBMDC) have been negligent in their handling of my FOI Question 3 since their original response of 27th of December 2018.

Regards Mr S. Hussain

Mr Hussain left an annotation ()

Chronology of events during ICO investigation

28 June 2023 - The ICO confirms complaint is eligible for investigation.

19 July 2023 - The ICO confirms the complaint is now allocated to be investigated.

8 August 2023 - I write to request a progress update

9 August 2023 - The ICO investigator confirms the case is still ongoing.

31 August 2023 - The ICO investigator, by way of update, confirms awaiting some further information from the LA.

20 September 2023 - The ICO provides a final decision notice which is escalated to the First Tier Tribunal (FTT)

Mr Hussain left an annotation ()

Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Decision notice

Date: 20 September 2023

Public Authority: City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council
Address: City Hall Centenary Square Bradford
West Yorkshire BD1 1HY

Decision (including any steps ordered)

1. The complainant submitted a request to the City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (the Council) for information relating to direct care payments.

2. The Commissioner’s decision is that, on the balance of probabilities, the Council does not hold any information within scope of the request and has therefore complied with section 1(1) of FOIA.

3. The Commissioner does not require further steps as a result of this decision notice.

Request and response

4. On 7 May 2023, the complainant wrote to the Council and requested information in the following terms:

“On the 14th of November 2018, a user by the name of [redacted] made the following request via the WhatDoTheyKnow website:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/d...
On the 27th of December 2018, you had responded to the questions put to you.
I would now like to put to the Council the very same questions once again but to shift the time range of the enquiry period, in order to update this enquiry.

Q1. How many times has a resident of the L.A been done for fraud against them and fined or jailed covering the period from December 2018 until May 2023. This relates to direct care payments.

Q2. How many of these was safeguarding relatives like the mental health act does under a section. or when the office of the public guardian takes power.

Q3. Do you have numbers of fraud cases where the accused have never spent the money.”

5. A response was provided on 24 May 2023, in which the Council confirmed that the answer to all questions was zero.

6. Upon receiving this response, the complainant submitted a supplementary request, on 26 May 2023:
“Please can you kindly confirm in the affirmative that over the last decade or so, from 2012 onwards, you have only ever had one case which has met the criteria of the FOI questions asked of you and resulted in a criminal conviction?”

7. The Council sought clarification and the complainant responded on 9 June 2023 stating:
“As you have sort further clarity I would like to extend the timeframe further back to commence from 2017 to the present. So I need you to confirm that the following updated enquiry is correct:

Q1. How many times has a resident of the L.A been done for fraud against them and fined or jailed covering the period from 15 January 2007 (the date the Fraud Act 2006 became law) until end of May 2023. This relates to direct care payments.
Is your revised response now: One?
Q2. How many of these was safeguarding relatives like the mental health act does under a section or when the office of the public guardian takes power.
Is your revised response now: One?
Q3. Do you have numbers of fraud cases where the accused have never spent the money.
Is you revised response now: One?”

8. On 13 June 2023, the Council provided a response, in which, in relation to questions one and two, it stated that the answer was one, and in response to question three it confirmed that the information was not held.

9. Upon receiving this response, the complainant asked the Council to conduct an internal review on 13 June 2023 and on 16 June 2023, the Council provide its internal review response and confirmed that in relation to question one, the answer is zero and that the answers to questions two and three were not applicable/not held.

Scope of the case

10. The complainant contacted the Commissioner on 16 June 2023 to complain about the way their request for information had been handled.

11. As the complainant has informed both the Council and the Commissioner that their complaint centres on the response provided in relation to question three, the Commissioner considers that this is the scope of his investigation.

Reasons for decision

Section 1 (Held/Not Held)

12. Section 1(1) of FOIA states that:

Any person making a request for information to a public authority is entitled-
(a) to be informed in writing by the public authority whether it holds information of the description specified in the request, and
(b) if that is the case, to have that information communicated to him.

13. The Commissioner has sought to determine whether, on the balance of probabilities, the Council holds the requested information, in relation to question three.

14. In submissions to the Commissioner, and in its internal review, the Council explained that it is unable to “ratify that money was never spent”.

15. The Commissioner clarified this with the Council, for in the previous request, mentioned by the complainant, it had responded to the same question and confirmed that the answer was one.

16. The Council explained that the response to the request in 2018, was an inaccuracy, and it should have stated not held. It also confirmed that it provided the complainant an explanation of this and apologised for the inaccuracy.

17. The Commissioner notes the complainant’s comments that they looked to “seek clarity by connecting both the 2018 and 2023 FOI’s to have the FOI disclosures confirmed as complete, consistent and comprehensive”, and he understands the confusion caused by the varying responses. However, the Commissioner does accept the Council’s position that it cannot prove that money was never spent, and that through its submissions it has now adequately addressed this.

18. On the balance of probabilities, the Commissioner is satisfied that the Council does not hold any information falling within scope of question three and that it has complied with section 1(1) of FOIA.

Right of appeal

19. Either party has the right to appeal against this decision notice to the First-tier Tribunal (Information Rights). Information about the appeals process may be obtained from:

First-tier Tribunal (Information Rights) GRC & GRP Tribunals,
PO Box 9300, LEICESTER, LE1 8DJ

Tel: 0203 936 8963
Fax: 0870 739 5836
Email: grc@justice.gov.uk
Website: www.justice.gov.uk/tribunals/general-reg... chamber

20. If you wish to appeal against a decision notice, you can obtain information on how to appeal along with the relevant forms from the Information Tribunal website.

21. Any Notice of Appeal should be served on the Tribunal within 28 (calendar) days of the date on which this decision notice is sent.

Signed

Joanna Marshall Group Manager
Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House Water Lane Wilmslow Cheshire
SK9 5AF