Urgent Verification of County Court Records Required By The Ministry Of Justice

Sadie Simmonds made this Rhyddid Gwybodaeth request to Ministry of Justice

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

Yn disgwyl am adolygiad mewnol gan Ministry of Justice o'u triniaeth o'r cais hwn.

Dear Ministry of Justice,

URGENT REQUEST: Urgent Verification of County Court Records Required By The Ministry Of Justice

This request is urgent and is presented to you in protection of my and my family Human Rights under Article 6 – Right to a fair trial and Article 8 – Right to respect for our private and family life.

This request is specifically addressed the Ministry of Justice Technology directorate and to the Information Asset Owner (IAO) holding the data relating to all civil court proceedings.

A - Confirm that you have all the recorded information stored and managed in your secure data centre system managed by the MoJ Technology directorate for the case ref. no.: D3QZ033D allegedly issued by the County Court Business Centre.

B - Confirm that all the recorded information contained in the computerised court record for the County Court case ref. no.: D3QZ033D was directly transferred to the MoJ by the administration of the originating County Court who recorded it on to Caseman system and it is now controlled by the MoJ Technology directorate.

C – Confirm that all the recorded information relevant to the County Court case ref. no.: D3QZ033D is in possession of the Information Asset Owner (IAO) as a member of the MoJ Operational Directorate and as part of all the data held, relating to all civil court proceedings under the direct control of the Ministry of Justice.

D – Provide all the recorded information including the direct mailing address and contact details for the MoJ Technology directorate and also for the Information Asset Owner (IAO) controlling and dealing with all the data stored for County Court case ref. no.: D3QZ033D allegedly created by the County Court at Barnet.

This request is urgent because me and my family were are experiencing huge distress and damages as result of the above court case in violation of our fundamental rights under the EU Convention.

Thank you in advance for your cooperation against serious crime,

Yours faithfully,

Sadie Simmonds

Dear Ministry of Justice,

RE: CLARIFICATION FOR THIS REQUEST - ORIGINATION COUNTY COURT IS ALLEGEDLY THE COUNTY COURT BUSINESS CENTRE

The correct court for the above request is the County Court Business Centre and not the County Court at Barnet as (typed by mistake) in the last paragraph of this request.

Yours faithfully,

Sadie Simmonds

Dear Ministry of Justice,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Ministry of Justice's handling of my FOI request 'Urgent Verification of County Court Records Required By The Ministry Of Justice'.

The Ministry of Justice failed to respond this FOI request despite the importance and the way this matter is affecting our family human rights and fundamental liberties.

As part of your internal review:
A- Provide response to all our questions

and
B - We have a protected right to access the information we requested from your department. Explain why you failed to provide a response despite this is a clear breach of our human rights.

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

Yours faithfully,

Sadie Simmonds

1 Atodiad

Dear Ms Simmonds

 

Please find attached response to your recent FOI request

 

Kind Regards

 

Nickie Gardner

Helpdesk Team Leader

County Court Business Centre

Northampton

Helpdesk: 0300 123 1056

Fax: 0845 408 5317

"I am not authorised to bind the Ministry of Justice contractually, nor
make representations or other statements which may bind the Ministry of
Justice in any way via electronic means."

 

 

 

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy
all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

Dear Ministry of Justice,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Ministry of Justice's handling of my FOI request 'Urgent Verification of County Court Records Required By The Ministry Of Justice'.

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

GROUNDS FOR DEMANDING AN URGENT INTERNAL REVIEW:

In your response dated 16 October 2017 you refused to provide the information I requested quoting that ‘the MoJ holds some information that I have requested …however, the MoJ claim that it is exempt from disclosure under section 40(1) of the FOIA, because it constitutes your (my) own personal data’.

The MoJ then suggest that I present a subject access request to request a copy of my personal data.

I contest the MoJ’s decision to withhold the information I requested and demand an urgent internal review.

I was very surprised to have confirmation from the Ministry of Justice that I am the data subject of the County Court proceedings ref. No. D3QZ033D as I have never received any court document under such reference number.

Until very recently I was not even aware that such court proceedings existed at all.

Below I listed my reasons in details for contesting your refusal to disclose the information I requested:

- The MoJ’s officer has not explained what implies the exemption 40 (1) and why this exemption would be appropriate in this FOI request to deny me access to the information.

- It was not anywhere stated in this FOI request that I am or I was party into any proceedings for the case ref. no. D3QZ033D allegedly issued by the County Court Business Centre.

- The FOI request is based on anonymised data without any name attached to it, namely a ref. no. D3QZ033D of an alleged proceedings.

- I am not aware that County Court proceedings case ref. no. D3QZ033D have been duly issued and / or served on me. Surprisingly the MoJ implied in its response that the information that I have requested constitute my own personal data (?).

- I am not aware that proceedings with a ref. no. D3QZ033D and related data / documentation have been ever sent to my attention and therefore I am entitled to ask if any public record exists that is lawful given that the MoJ implies that I may the data subject.

- I am also entitled to verify the accuracy of any data in connection with proceedings with a ref. no. D3QZ033D in case their data exist in public records. I cannot assess the fairness and lawfulness of how my data may have been processed without the official confirmation that proceedings, of which I may be the data subject, exist in public records.

- I have never consented to any of my personal data to be processed in relation to proceedings with a ref. no. D3QZ033D.

- I have never stated in any question of this FOI request that the information I requested constitutes my personal data of which, I the applicant, am the data subject. From your response, this appears to be an information which is solely in your possession.

- This FOI request does not require copy of documents or files of which, I the applicant, am the data subject.
This request requires only confirmation that proceedings and their public records exist in relation to County Court proceedings case ref. no. D3QZ033D.

- I am not aware that any exemption exist or can be used to deny the existence of be used to refuse to confirm the existence of court proceedings or anything relating to litigation.

- The answered I required (which the MoJ refused to provide) were also anonymised as no personal data which could lead to any harmful disclosure was necessary. In any event, the laws of contempt should provide adequate protection against any possible harmful disclosure.

- In case you may assume that the information I requested constitutes my personal data I shall rely on Section 35, in which personal data are exempt from the non-disclosure provisions where disclosure is required by or under any enactment, by rule of law or by order of the court, where the disclosure is necessary in connection with legal proceedings (as in this case) or for the purpose of obtaining legal advice (as in this case), or is otherwise necessary for the purposes of establishing, exercising or defending legal rights (as in this case).

- Where the the MoJ’s coercive powers are engaged, these should not encroach upon people’s rights more than is fairly and reasonably necessary. In this case the disclosure is for the purpose of performing your public duties as the MoJ’s stated priorities to protect the public, to provide access to justice, to increase confidence in the justice system and to uphold people’s civil liberties.

Among the MoJ’s public and stated Priorities relevant to this case there is also to assure "better law“ and Assure that law-making is transparent and accountable, safeguarding civil liberties and enabling citizens to receive the proper protection of the law.

How can I be protected if the MoJ refuses to confirm the existence of proceedings and public court records of which I am not aware and of which I may be the data subject, according to the MoJ?

Therefore, the Ministry of Justice is unlawfully withholding the information in its possession.

I therefore require a speedy internal review with a response to the questions of this FOI request in defence of our Human Rights and those of our family under Article 5, Article 6 to grant us the right to a fair trial and Article 8, the right to respect for our private and family life.

Yours faithfully,

Sadie Simmonds

South East KILO,

1 Atodiad

Dear Ms Simmonds
Please see the attached acknowledgment of your request for an internal
review (our reference IR 114937)
 

London and South East Regional Support Unit | HMCTS

Web: [1]www.gov.uk/hmcts

 

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy
all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.gov.uk/hmcts
http://www.gov.uk/hmcts

South East KILO,

1 Atodiad

Dear Ms Simmonds
 
Please see the attached response to your request for an internal review
(our reference FOI 114937)
 

London and South East Regional Support Unit | HMCTS

Web: [1]www.gov.uk/hmcts

 

 

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of
the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying
is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy
all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message
could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in
mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message
by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be
read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.gov.uk/hmcts
http://www.gov.uk/hmcts

Dear Ministry of Justice,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Ministry of Justice's handling of my FOI request 'Urgent Verification of County Court Records Required By The Ministry Of Justice'.

I GIVE DETAILS ABOUT MY COMPLAINT HERE:

I received a letter from the MoJ’s Disclosure Team via email dated 30 November 2017 in response to my legal notice dated 2 November 2017 sent to To: Ministry of Justice (MoJ), The Head Manager of Data and Compliance Unit - Information Directorate – Post Point 10.38 at 102 Petty France in London - SW1H 9AJ.

In your letter in response you have incorrectly dealt with my questions classifying them as freedom of information request under the FOIA and assigned a reference number 171108009.
My legal notice dated 2 November 2017 is requiring the verification of Court Records Required by the Ministry of County Court for:
- Case ref. no. 0085 - 2016 allegedly issued by the administration (HMCTS) of the County Court at Romford
- County Court case ref. no. D3QZ033D allegedly issued by the administration of the County Court Business Centre.

My legal notice was asking the following questions:
A - Confirm that you have all the recorded information stored and managed in your secure data centre system managed by the MoJ Technology directorate for the cases:
• Ref. no: 0085 - 2016 (County Court at Romford) and,
• Ref. no: D3QZ033D (County Court Business Centre) and, the date in which each of these two proceedings were recorded and stored in the Caseman database.

B - Confirm that all the recorded information contained in the computerised court records for the two County Court cases ref. no: 0085 - 2016, and Ref. no: D3QZ033D were directly transferred to the MoJ by the administration of each originating County Court who recorded it on to Caseman system, provide the date in which each case was respectively transferred for the first time and confirm that all the data of each case are now controlled by the MoJ Technology directorate.

C – Confirm that all the recorded information relevant to the County Court cases ref. no: 0085 - 2016, and Ref. no: D3QZ033D are in possession of the Information Asset Owner (IAO) as a member of the MoJ Operational Directorate and as part of all the data held, relating to all civil court proceedings under the direct control of the Ministry of Justice.

In my legal notice I then notified to the MoJ some IMPORTANT ISSUES which I detail below:

- Those proceedings must have been created and transmitted to the MoJ official database if they were duly and lawfully issued by the originating County Court.

- Based on evidence available I do not believe that any public records exist for these cases. This implies that E-enabled / Cyber fraud may have occurred and that information technology has been used by HMCTS admin staff to manipulate data dishonestly e.g. by altering, substituting, or like in these two cases ref. no: 0085 - 2016, and Ref. no: D3QZ033D creating spurious records.

- The Internal Audit and Assurance Anti-Fraud and Corruption Policy by the Ministry of Justice (Published November 2014) states that ‘The MoJ's policy on fraud and corruption is one of zero tolerance, whether involving its own staff, or other external individuals or bodies. It is MoJ's policy to refer all instances of fraud both actual and reasonably suspected to the relevant police authorities. All cases will be thoroughly investigated and dealt with appropriately.’ (Executive Summary, para.2).

After your acknowledgement of the legal content of my Legal Notice I kindly asked the MoJ to provide confirmation that you will be acting in accordance with the Internal Audit and Assurance Anti-Fraud and Corruption Policy by the Ministry of Justice (Published November 2014).

The legal notice included a REMINDER OF DATA SUBJECT (MY) RIGHTS:

• I am entitled to verify the accuracy of those records and this process starts from the confirmation of their presence in the official database controlled and managed by the MoJ.

• I am entitled to obtain the official certification that those proceedings are included in the official caseman database containing all the public records with the data held, relating to every civil court proceedings in the County Court and High Court managed and controlled by the Ministry of Justice.

• In line with the law the data controller has to specify the purposes they are processing data. Personal data shall be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date. Public authority will need to regularly review personal data they hold. To comply with the most fundamental data principles you need to take steps to ensure the accuracy of data that you hold and regularly review your records.

The legal notice concluded stating that my request is urgent because my family and I were are experiencing huge distress and damages as result of the above court case/s in violation of our fundamental rights under the EU Convention.

My legal notice ended stating: “Please respond within 21 days from the date above”.

My legal notice Demanded the MoJ to Act in accordance with my Human Rights under Article 6 and 8 and with the Ministry of Justice Internal Anti-Fraud and Corruption Policy.

The response letter dated 30 November 2017 from the Ministry of Justice’s Disclosure Team which I received response was surprisingly aggressive.

Rather than answering my questions under the Data Protection Act in your response you made allegations writing that “The MoJ considers your request to be vexatious for the following reasons:
Deliberate intention to cause annoyance, no obvious intent to obtain information, burden to authority and disproportionate efforts in order to meet my request and answer my questions.

Your letter was not bearing the name of any MoJ’s officer.

I strongly reject your unnecessary threatening response.

I simply presented my questions under my human rights and under the Data Protection Act. Rather than answering the questions your unnamed officer made unfair allegations and has incorrectly dealt with my questions classifying them as freedom of information request under the FOIA.

So the Ministry of Justice refuses to answer my questions under the DPA and the human rights but it also refuses to answer them under the Freedom of Information Act. Your persistent refusal to answer my questions is not compatible with Article 8 and Article 6 of the ECHR.

QUESTION:
Most public authorities will have well-established procedures setting out who should be involved involved in the drafting or approval of Data Protection Act and FOI responses and in the decision to disclose information.

As part of this FOI request please clarify what route do I need to pursue to get the answers?

Please kindly provide the name of your officer in your next response.

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

Yours faithfully,

Sadie Simmonds