How many times have Northumbria Police instructed Phillips Law Firm and or any of its Solicitors between February 2011 and February 2012

Martin McGartland 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.

Northumbria Police Nid oedd gan y wybodaeth y gofynnwyd amdani.

Martin McGartland

Dear Northumbria Police,

Please supply all recorded information concerning following;

1. How many times, if any, have Northumbria Police instructed Phillips Law Firm and or any of its Solicitors between February 2011 and February 2012.

2. Have Northumbria Police entered into any type of written or verbal contact/s and or agreement/s with Phillips Law Firm and or any of its Solicitors. If so, please supply full details.

3. Please list all amounts paid, if any, to Phillips Law Firm and or any of its Solicitors concerning any matters that relate to the Raoul Moat case.

4. Please detail reason/s for all/any payment/s regards 3 above.

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

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 expect to revert to
you shortly.  A response should be provided by 10 April 2012.

Yours sincerely

Helen Robbins

Disclosure Section

[NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

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/

Gadawodd Martin McGartland anodiad ()

Get more info on the Martin McGartland case and the State Cover-up;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZ7zsUJYE...

http://www.youtube.com/user/dufferpad

www.martinmcgartland.co.uk

Northumbria Police

1 Atodiad

Provision of Information held by Northumbria Police under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (the" Act")

With regard to your email in which you make a request for information that
Northumbria Police may hold.

I regret that Northumbria Police will not be able to complete its response
to you by the date originally stated.  We are still researching the
information held and considering whether any exemptions under the Act may
apply.

I can now advise you that the new date for the provision of the
information is 8 May 2012.  I can assure that every effort will be made to
ensure that a response will be provided to you within this new timescale.

Your attention is drawn to the attachment which contains your complaint
rights.

Yours sincerely

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/

Martin McGartland

Dear Northumbria Police,

The Information Commissioner’s guidance 'Time for compliance' : http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/l... states that;

1. "What is the time limit for responding to a request for information?

A public authority must inform the applicant in writing whether it holds the information requested and if so, communicate that information to the applicant, promptly, but not later than 20 working days after receipt of the request; section 10(1)."

Northumbria Police have not confirmed if they hold the requested information nor have they released the non-exempt information within the 20 working day limit.

The guidance also states;

7. "What if the public authority needs more time to consider exemptions?

Any information which the public authority is required to release must be disclosed to the applicant within the 20 working day time limit. Where the
authority is relying on one or more of the exemptions and is withholding information, it must issue a Refusal Notice (under section 17 of the Act) within
the same timeframe, specifying the exemption and why it applies. There is a provision in the Act, at section 10(3), which allows the 20 working day time limit to be extended to a ‘reasonable’ time, where the authority is required to apply the public interest test, because one of the ‘qualified’ exemptions applies. However, the authority must inform the applicant in its
Refusal Notice if it needs more time to consider the public interest in disclosure and must give an estimate of the date by which it expects to make
its decision. [FOI Act, s10(3)] A public authority must be prepared to justify to the Information Commissioner any time it takes, beyond the 20 working days, to consider disclosure in the Version 2 4 11 September 2008."

I also understand that the 20 working day limit can only be extended in exceptional circumstances. This is not an 'exceptional' case nor request.

I am now making a complaint to the ICO.

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

Martin McGartland

Dear Northumbria Police,

I have this afternoon made a complaint to the ICO concerning this matter.

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

Gadawodd Martin McGartland anodiad ()

Keep up to date with the Martin McGartland story and the Northumbria Police, MI5 and State Cover-up of his attempted murder:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZ7zsUJYE...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6q5WkKdhu...

http://www.scribd.com/martymcgartland

www.martinmcgartland.co.uk

Northumbria Police

1 Atodiad

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

Thank you for your email dated 9 March 2012 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:

Please supply all recorded information concerning following;

1.        How many times, if any, have Northumbria Police instructed
Phillips Law Firm and or any of its Solicitors between February 2011 and
February 2012.

2.        Have Northumbria Police entered into any type of written or
verbal contact/s and or agreement/s with Phillips Law Firm and or any of
its Solicitors. If so, please supply full details.

3.        Please list all amounts paid, if any, to Phillips Law Firm and
or any of its Solicitors concerning any matters that relate to the Raoul
Moat case.

4.        Please detail reason/s for all/any payment/s regards 3 above

In response:

We 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 Legal
Department of Northumbria Police.  I can confirm that the information you
have requested is held not held by Northumbria Police, as we have not had
any dealing with 'Phillips Law Firm'.
You may be interested to know that Northumbria Police routinely publish
information that has been disclosed by Northumbria Police in response to
requests made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 via the Disclosure
Log.  The aim of the Disclosure Log is to promote openness and
transparency by voluntarily placing information into the public arena.

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:-

[1]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.

How to complain

If you are unhappy with our decision or do not consider that we have
handled your request properly and we are unable to resolve this issue
informally, you are entitled to make a formal complaint to us under our
complaints procedure which is attached.

If you are still unhappy after we have investigated your complaint and
reported to you the outcome, you may complain directly to the Information
Commissioner’s Office and request that they investigate to ascertain
whether we have dealt with your request in accordance with the Act.

Yours sincerely

Michael Cleugh
Data Protection and Disclosure Advisor
Direct Dial:  01661 868347
[NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

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 -
[2]http://www.northumbria.police.uk

References

Visible links
1. http://www.northumbria.police.uk/foi/dis...
2. http://www.northumbria.police.uk/

Martin McGartland

Dear Mr Cleugh,

I am not requesting an internal review at this state.

On the 10th April 2012 you wrote to me and you stated: “I regret that Northumbria Police will not be able to complete its response to you by the date originally stated. We are still researching the information held and considering whether any exemptions under the Act may apply.”

After I informed NP that I had made further complaints, as above, to the ICO they wrote to me and stated;

“I can confirm that the information you have requested is held not held by Northumbria Police...”
I’m confused, is the information held or not?

If NP are saying they don’t hold information why then did you fail to inform me of same within 20 days. Moreover, why did you state in your reply; “We are still researching the information held and considering whether any exemptions under the Act may apply.” ???

I would like an explanation as to what is going on.

Notwithstanding the above NP (in fact you Mr Cleugh) have stated following in your reply to me dated 1st December 2011,

“3. Samuel Phillips from time to time have provided agency Solicitor services to Northumbria Police in relation to Civil Claims, employment law, inquest law and discipline proceedings.” Here is the link to refresh your memory; http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/al...

I would also like an explanation on this too. It seems to me that NP or either concealing the requested information or they are very deliberately subjecting me to further and unnecessary delays. I will be asking the ICO to investigate these matters too.

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

Northumbria Police

Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 265/12 - Phillips Law Firm

Dear Mr McGartland

Thank you for your email below.

I shall address the points raised in turn.

The text "is held" should have been deleted from your response as we have
stated that we have not had any dealings with 'Phillips Law Firm',
apologies for any inconvenience caused.

When the extension notice was issued, we were still researching if any
information was held and whether it was appropriate to consider a response
or whether it would be more appropriate to neither confirm nor deny
whether information was held.  At that stage, whilst exemptions had not
been applied, exemptions were being considered.

Regarding your third point, the link supplied is to a request regarding
"Samuel Phillips Law Firm".  This is clearly a different law firm to
"Phillips" law firm and therefore the responses to the two requests do not
relate to each other.

I hope that this resolves these issues to your satisfaction.

Yours sincerely

Michael Cleugh

From:        Martin McGartland
<[FOI #108690 email]> on 13/04/2012 22:43 CET

To:        [Northumbria Police request email]
cc:        
Subject:        Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 265/12
- Phillips Law Firm [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

     Dear Mr Cleugh,
   
    I am not requesting an internal review at this state.
   
    On the 10th April 2012 you wrote to me and you stated: “I regret
    that Northumbria Police will not be able to complete its response
    to you by the date originally stated. We are still researching the
    information held and considering whether any exemptions under the
    Act may apply.”
   
    After I informed NP that I had made further complaints, as above,
    to the ICO they wrote to me and stated;
   
    “I can confirm that the information you have requested is held not
    held by Northumbria Police...”
    I’m confused, is the information held or not?
   
    If NP are saying they don’t hold information why then did you fail
    to inform me of same within 20 days. Moreover, why did you state in
    your reply; “We are still researching the information held and
    considering whether any exemptions under the Act may apply.” ???
   
    I would like an explanation as to what is going on.
   
    Notwithstanding the above NP (in fact you Mr Cleugh) have stated
    following in your reply to me dated 1st December 2011,
   
    “3. Samuel Phillips from time to time have provided agency
    Solicitor services to Northumbria Police in relation to Civil
    Claims, employment law, inquest law and discipline proceedings.”
    Here is the link to refresh your memory;
   
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/al...
   
    I would also like an explanation on this too. It seems to me that
    NP or either concealing the requested information or they are very
    deliberately subjecting me to further and unnecessary delays. I
    will be asking the ICO to investigate these matters too.
   
    Yours faithfully,
   
    Martin McGartland
   
   

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Martin McGartland

Dear Northumbria Police,

You have informed me that; “The text "is held" should have been deleted from your response as we have stated that we have not had any dealings with 'Phillips Law Firm', apologies for any inconvenience caused.” Thank you for that.

You also wrote: “Regarding your third point, the link supplied is to a request regarding "Samuel Phillips Law Firm". This is clearly a different law firm to
"Phillips" law firm and therefore the responses to the two requests do not relate to each other.”

You are indeed correct, apologies for any inconvenience caused. The firm that I am requesting information on is Samuel Phillips Law Firm. Please can you ensure that all of my requests relate to Samuel Phillips Law Firm only.

It would seem that I have deleted ‘Samuel’, in error, from Samuel Phillips Law Firm.

Please let me know if I need to resubmit all or my requests or if they can be amended.

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

Northumbria Police

Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 265/12 - Phillips Law Firm
Dear Mr McGartland

Thank you for your email below.

I have checked our records, and it appears that only this request refers
to 'Phillips Law Firm' rather than 'Samuel Phillips Law Firm'.

Therefore, none of your other request will need amending or resubmitting.

However, if you are aware of any requests other than this one which refer
to 'Phillips Law Firm' only, then please come back to me and I will make
further searches.

Regards

Helen

From:        Martin McGartland
<[FOI #108690 email]> on 17/04/2012 13:23 CET

To:        [Northumbria Police request email]
cc:        
Subject:        Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 265/12
- Phillips Law Firm [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

     Dear Northumbria Police,
   
    You have informed me that; “The text "is held" should have been
    deleted from your response as we have stated that we have not had
    any dealings with 'Phillips Law Firm', apologies for any
    inconvenience caused.” Thank you for that.
   
    You also wrote: “Regarding your third point, the link supplied is
    to a request regarding "Samuel Phillips Law Firm". This is clearly
    a different law firm to
    "Phillips" law firm and therefore the responses to the two requests
    do not relate to each other.”
   
    You are indeed correct, apologies for any inconvenience caused. The
    firm that I am requesting information on is Samuel Phillips Law
    Firm. Please can you ensure that all of my requests relate to
    Samuel Phillips Law Firm only.
   
    It would seem that I have deleted ‘Samuel’, in error, from Samuel
    Phillips Law Firm.
   
    Please let me know if I need to resubmit all or my requests or if
    they can be amended.
   
    Yours faithfully,
   
    Martin McGartland
   
   

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Martin McGartland

Dear Northumbria Police,

Thank you for that. Can you confirm that this request will now be dealt with as 'Samuel Phillips Law Firm' or do I need to send it as a new request?.

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

Northumbria Police

Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 265/12 - Phillips Law Firm
Dear Mr McGartland

You ask below if this request can now "be dealt with as Samuel Phillips
Law Firm", rather than Phillips Law Firm.  However, from our records it
appears that this request has already been processed in both formats.

The same questions have previously been asked in relation to "Samuel
Phillips Law Firm", our reference FOIA Request 266/12 - Samuel Phillips
Law Firm refers, and you have requested an internal review of our
response.  Please see the what do they know website, via the link below:-
[1]http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ho...

If I can be of any further assistance please let me know.

Regards

Helen

From:        Martin McGartland
<[FOI #108690 email]> on 19/04/2012 14:08 CET

To:        [Northumbria Police request email]
cc:        
Subject:        Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 265/12
- Phillips Law Firm [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

     Dear Northumbria Police,
   
    Thank you for that. Can you confirm that this request will now be
    dealt with as 'Samuel Phillips Law Firm' or do I need to send it as
    a new request?.
   
    Yours faithfully,
   
    Martin McGartland
   
   

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Martin McGartland

Dear Northumbria Police,

Thank you for that.

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

Martin McGartland

Dear Northumbria Police,

I would be obliged if you could let me have an update on this request.

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

Northumbria Police

Dear Mr MGartland

Further  to your email below in relation to the above mentioned request.

A Decision Notice was issued by the Information Commissioner on 30 April
2012, in which it stated that "he public authority breached section 10(1)
of FOIA by failing to confirm whether it held the requested information
within the statutory time limit. However, as it provided a response
shortly after the time limit expired he does not require it to take any
further steps."

For your information, a copy of the Decision Notice is available via the
following link:-
[1]http://www.ico.gov.uk/~/media/documents/...

Therefore, we now consider this matter closed.

However, with regards to your question below where you ask below if this
request can now "be dealt with as Samuel Phillips Law Firm", rather than
Phillips Law Firm.

You were advised that this request has already been processed in both
formats, ie the same questions have previously been asked in relation to
"Samuel Phillips Law Firm" also, our reference FOIA Request 266/12 –
Samuel Phillips Law Firm refers, and you have requested an internal review
of our response.  Please see the what do they know website, via the link
below:-
[2]http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ho...
Regards

Helen

From:        Martin McGartland
<[FOI #108690 email]> on 21/05/2012 11:47

To:        [Northumbria Police request email]
cc:        
Subject:        Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 265/12
- Phillips Law Firm [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

     Dear Northumbria Police,
   
    I would be obliged if you could let me have an update on this
    request.
   
    Yours faithfully,
   
    Martin McGartland
   
   

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Martin McGartland

Dear Northumbria Police,

As it stands I have not been sent any information at all concerning request/s I have made relating to this firm and all/any monies paid to it by NP from public funds. NP continue to delay such requests and they are concealing (which is against the law) non-exempt recorded information. Please deal with the outstanding requests.

I note what you say concerning the ICO warning Northumbria Police yet again for its breaches of the FOIA when dealing with my cases, however, NP continue to breach the FOIA.

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

Northumbria Police

Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 265/12 - Phillips Law Firm

Dear Mr McGartland

The request submitted by you under the above whatdotheyknow ref:-
"[FOI #108690 email]", relates to 'Phillips Law
Firm'.  This request was logged with the Northumbria Police ref:- "Freedom
of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 265/12 - Philips Law Firm".  Our
response to this request, forwarded to you on 13/04/12 advised that "I can
confirm that the information you have requested is held not held by
Northumbria Police, as we have not had any dealing with Phillips Law
Firm".

As we had no dealing with "Phillips Law Firm", we do therefore not hold
any recorded information about them and no information was concealed, and
as such no recorded information to consider with regards to this .  We are
also aware that we were in breach of Section 10(1).

As advised below, in my email of 21/05/12 - the same questions listed in
this request were submitted by you with regards to "Samuel Phillips Law
Firm".  These were submitted under the whatdotheyknow ref:-
"[email address]", our ref:- Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 266/12 – Samuel Phillips Law Firm, and
you have requested an internal review of our response.  All matters
relating to this request are being processed under this whatdotheyknow ref
and our ref FOI 266/12.  Therefore, if you wish to enquire about this
matter can you please do so under the relevant ref numbers relating to
this request and not those relating to a request which is now closed.

Regards

Helen

From:        Martin McGartland
<[FOI #108690 email]> on 23/05/2012 13:10

To:        [Northumbria Police request email]
cc:        
Subject:        Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Request 265/12
- Phillips Law Firm [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

     Dear Northumbria Police,
   
    As it stands I have not been sent any information at all concerning
    request/s I have made relating to this firm and all/any monies paid
    to it by NP from public funds. NP continue to delay such requests
    and they are concealing (which is against the law) non-exempt
    recorded information. Please deal with the outstanding requests.
   
    I note what you say concerning the ICO warning Northumbria Police
    yet again for its breaches of the FOIA when dealing with my cases,
    however, NP continue to breach the FOIA.
   
    Yours faithfully,
   
    Martin McGartland
   
   

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Martin McGartland

Dear Northumbria Police,

You are well aware, as above, that we have dealt with the issue regards name of firm. I wrote to you and included following;

"You are indeed correct, apologies for any inconvenience caused. The firm that I am requesting information on is Samuel Phillips Law Firm. Please can you ensure that all of my requests relate to Samuel Phillips Law Firm only."

NP are refusing to supply me with recorded information I have been requesting about this firm, Why?

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland