[potentially defamatory material removed]

Response to this request is long overdue. By law, under all circumstances, Independent Office for Police Conduct should have responded by now (details). You can complain by requesting an internal review.

Dear Independent Police Complaints Commission,

I would like to ask for all the supporting evidence that led one of your people, namely [potentially defamatory material removed] to reach the decision she did to support corrupt police officers at South Wales Police.

[extraneous material removed]

I also want the rationale behind the decision to not approach my MP to ask for her opinion on what Chief Superintendent Tim Jones said to her and now this officer has left his post for reasons south Wales Police refuse to share with me.

Yours faithfully,

Mark Ritchie

!FOI Requests,

This is an automated email please do not respond to it.

Thank you for your email.

If you have made a request for information to the IPCC, your email and any attachments will be assessed logged and forwarded onto the appropriate department to acknowledge and respond to.

FOI Team

show quoted sections

Phil Johnston,

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Ritchie,

Please find attached to this email our letter responding to your request.

Please quote our reference 1005573 in any further correspondence about this request.

Yours sincerely,

P Johnston

IPCC

show quoted sections

Charlotte Peters Rock left an annotation ()

Perhaps the letter from IPCC should have begun, 'On behalf of IPCC I must apologise. We were wrong.This request definitely was à Subject Access Request. You are right. We will fulfil your request with the greatest expediency, and with no chargé to you. We will also ensure the retraining of all our operatives, to ensure they fully understand the legislation under which they work.' ??

Is that really too much to ask?

Steven King left an annotation ()

I have also found information requested under FOIA here on WDTK has been ' converted ' into a SAR under DPA - also thereby ensuring information NOT supplied is not subjected to widespread public scrutiny , and information that is supplied is only seen by the applicant .
I agree with Charlotte's comment - I am of the opinion that requests such as this one subject the request handlers and the organisation to a culture shock requiring them to be truthful - we shall see in this case, as surely this should be dealt with as TWO requests -under BOTH FOIA and DPA ??
Of course, nothing will prevent the applicant from informing us of the responses he receieves if he so chooses?
Good luck with your requestS .

Charlotte Peters Rock left an annotation ()

Yes. Good thought.

Mark Ritchie left an annotation ()

I will inform as soon as i have the appeal decision back from the IPCC.