whatdotheyknow FOI responses

Roedd y cais yn llwyddiannus.

Ganesh Sittampalam

Dear Brent Borough Council,

It seems that around September 2009 you started refusing to send FOI responses to email addresses @whatdotheyknow.com and instead requested an alternate email address from the requestors.

Please could you send me a copy of any responses to such requests (from the time you started doing this until now) that have been prepared but have not been sent to the original request address. This would include both responses where you sent the response to an alternate address and responses that were not sent because the requestor has not supplied an alternate address or for other reasons.

If this request would breach the costs limit, then I request that you instead provide as many responses as you can within the costs limit, working forward from the start date. If you are also unable to do this for any reason, then as advice and assistance please tell me what date range, again starting from the date you started treating requests in the way refered to above, you would be able to provide within the costs limit.

To be clear, the email address this request is coming from is my "address for correspondence" and I want the answer to be sent to it (in electronic form, naturally). If you refuse to do this, you must provide a proper refusal notice stating an exemption. I refer you to http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/d... for some precedent in this regard.

Yours faithfully,

Ganesh Sittampalam

Brent Borough Council

Brent Council - INFORMATION REQUEST

Our Reference: 566341
====================================================

Dear Mr. Sittampalam

Thank you for your request for information received on 17 December 2009. We
aim to respond to your request within 20 working days.

I have read your comments with interest and the ICO case referred to. The
Council pays careful regard to advice and guidance from the ICO and to
decisons of the ICO and Information Tribunal where these are applicable.

Please note that your request is accepted as a valid request and this is why
it is not appropriate to issue a decison notice at this stage. However,
whilst we may send the formal notification of the decision to the email
address you have provided we will not send the information requested to that
address. This is because we are aware that doing so will automatically
result in the information being published on the whatdotheyknow website.
Publication of information in this way may constitute an unauthorised re-use
(under the Re-use of Public Sector Information Regulations 2005) and may
infringe copyright. I would therefore be grateful if you will provide me
with an alternative disclosure address. This can be a postal address, fax
number or an email address, as long as it does not result in automatic
publication and re-use.

If you wish to apply for permission to re-use any of the requested
information you may do so by writing to the IT Standards Manager at Brent
Council, Floor 5, 349-357 High Road, Wembley HA9 6BZ , telephone 020 8937
1402, e-mail [Brent Borough Council request email]

If you wish to appeal against the requirement to provide an alternative
disclosure address you can do so by writing to the IT Standards Manager at
the address given above.

You also have a right of appeal to the Information Commissioner. However,
the Information Commissioner will not normally consider an appeal until you
have exhausted your rights of redress and complaint to the Council. The
Information Commissioner can be contacted as follows: Information
Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9
5AF; Telephone: 01625 545 700, www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk

Yours sincerely

Stephen F Williams
for Brent ITU
[email address]
--
The use of Brent Council's e-mail system may be monitored and communications read in order to secure effective operation of the system and other lawful purposes.

Ganesh Sittampalam

Dear Brent Borough Council,

Thank you for your email. I believe I have already made my position clear.

Yours faithfully,

Ganesh Sittampalam

Ganesh Sittampalam

Dear Brent Borough Council,

As you have not sent me the information I requested nor issued a proper refusal notice within the stautory 20 working days, I request an internal review of your handling of this request.

Yours faithfully,

Ganesh Sittampalam

Ganesh Sittampalam

Dear Brent Borough Council,

I note that you have not yet acknowledged my request for an internal review. This is a reminder in case you have lost it. If you need to, you can find the full details at http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/wh...

Yours faithfully,

Ganesh Sittampalam

Williams, Stephenf, Brent Borough Council

Dear Ganesh

Having reviewed your request and our request for you to supply us with an alternative address to send your information, I have concluded that your internal review has not been upheld.

The council has not and is not refusing to respond to your request which it accepts is valid and is ready to supply the information requested.

The council does have an issue with using the 'whatdotheyknow' email address. By using this email address, all responses are automatically uploaded on the associated website without any apparent control. You cannot assume that you can use information on the Internet freely just because it is available and free of charge. It does not mean you necessarily have an implied license.

The making of a Freedom of Information request cannot invalidate the council's rights to control further use of its own information or abrogate any duty it may owe to third party copyright holders. The concern is that disclosing information in the manner requested would make the council complicit in any such breach. Responding to an email address that automatically publishes responses does not make it possible for the council to exercise any controls referred to under the new regulations governing the re-use of public sector information, which came into force in July 2005 (Statutory Instrument 1515).

We have advised you of the means and circumstances in which we consider it reasonable to communicate the information requested. I urge you to supply an alternative address so that the information can be sent.

Rajesh Seedher
IT Standards Manager
Information Technology Unit
Business Transformation Department
Brent Council
Telephone 020 8937 1402

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Gadawodd Francis Irving anodiad ()

For the record there are at least two cases where the ICO disagrees with Brent.

1. ICO decision notice FS50217416 refers to several aspects of
copyright and FOI requests. In particular, these paragraphs:

"15. [...] With regard to copyright, the Commissioner considers that
FOI does not provide an implied licence for commercial or other
exploitation of released information, and that any person to whom
information is released is still bound by an obligation to respect any
intellectual property rights held within it. However he considers that
issues of possible copyright infringement fall outside the scope of
the Act and that if any breaches of such legislation were to transpire
then the Company should more properly address these elsewhere [..]"

"18. The Commissioner has explained above why he does not consider
issues regarding copyright and confidentiality fall within the scope
of section 11 of the Act. This is because they do not deal with the
question of whether it would be reasonably practicable to provide the
information in the preferred format. Therefore the Commissioner
considers any steps the Company considers it needs to take in order to
allay its concerns in relation to copyright and confidentiality can
also not be taken into account"

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/d...

2. I myself made an FOI request to the House of Commons, who have
taken a similar stance to Brent Borough Council. The ICO have recently
decided to rule on this matter, and have found in my favour.

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/on...

You can see the full details of my correspondence with the House of
Commons, which covers the fine technical detail of the case.

Gadawodd Ganesh Sittampalam anodiad ()

FS50296350

Ganesh Sittampalam

Dear Williams, Stephenf,

I have appealed to the Information Commissioner and I still expect the information I requested to be sent to this email address if he rules in my favour, but in the meantime please send a copy to [email address] - I note that you have stated that you are "ready to supply the information requested" and I therefore expect to receive it immediately.

Yours sincerely,

Ganesh Sittampalam

Gadawodd Trevor R Nunn anodiad ()

A must read for those wanting Brent to respond to their FOI requests via this website.

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/d...

Gadawodd Ganesh Sittampalam anodiad ()

Brent eventually replied to my private email address saying that because I'd appealed to the ICO they weren't going to do anything more until that process was concluded. I have written back objecting.

Gadawodd M Bimmler anodiad ()

Compare what they sent to me via whatdotheyknow.com after I prompted them:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ne...

"Dear Michael

Thank you. The ICO had already sent us a copy which we have read with interest and we are currently considering its implications for your case and others. Of course, as you will appreciate, the ICO is not the final arbiter in these matters and I am endeavouring to discover whether the House of Commons will be appealing to the First Tier Tribunal.

Regards

Stephen Williams

FOI & DPA Consultant
for Brent ITU"

Gadawodd M Bimmler anodiad ()

Ah, wait, sorry, I should read before writing. You were referring to your demand to release the records to your alternative email address...I somehow assumed that you wrote to them about the recent DN as well. The above doesn't make much sense therefore...

Williams, Stephenf, Brent Borough Council

18 Atodiad

From: Williams, Stephenf
Sent: 13 September 2010 15:55
To: '[email address]'
Subject: Re: FS50296350 - Information Requests+566341

Dear Mr Sittampalam

Please find enclosed an open copy of attachments relating to this
request. Further copies to follow.

Kind regards

Stephen Williams

FOI & DPA Consultant

Brent ITU

020 8937 1426

Floor 5

349-357 High Road

Wembley

HA9 6BZ

--
The use of Brent Council's e-mail system may be monitored and communications read in order to secure effective operation of the system and other lawful purposes.

Williams, Stephenf, Brent Borough Council

7 Atodiad

From: Williams, Stephenf
Sent: 13 September 2010 15:56
To: '[email address]'
Subject: Re: FS50296350 - Information Requests+566341

--
The use of Brent Council's e-mail system may be monitored and communications read in order to secure effective operation of the system and other lawful purposes.

Williams, Stephenf, Brent Borough Council

1 Atodiad

From: Williams, Stephenf
Sent: 11 August 2010 12:46
To: '[email address]';
'[email address]'
Cc: '[email address]'
Subject: FS50296350 - Information Requests+566341

Dear Mr Sittampalam

Further to recent correspondence with the Office of the Information
Commissioner I am writing to you to communicate the recorded information
which we are disclosing in response to the above request and the
subsequent appeal by you to the Information Commissioner.

We have searched for this information on our casework management system
against the details `whatdotheyknow' for the period 1^st September to
17^th December. This search returned the following cases.

544340

546163

556083

562704

563345

535300

Where information falling within the terms of the request was available at
the time of the request it is attached.

We have applied one exemption, Section 40(2) to redact the private address
details of requesters where appropriate and to redact the names of junior
or non public facing members of staff.

Section 40 (2) provides that personal data is exempt from disclosure if
disclosure would breach any of the data protection principles. In this
instance it is the first principle that would be breached. The first
principle requires that processing of personal data must be fair, legal
and in accordance with one of the conditions set out at schedule 2 to the
Data Protection Act. Disclosure of the identities of the persons
concerned would be unfair in the circumstances. We have also concluded
that none of the conditions for processing apply to disclosure of these
names. We have considered in particular condition 6, which requires the
legitimate interests of the persons to whom the information is to be
disclosed to be weighed against the rights of the individuals affected and
have concluded that disclosure in these circumstances is unwarranted.

The information has been zipped and password protected. The password is
available to you, the applicant, upon request .

Please note that the information provided may be subject to copyright and
you may require further permission from the Council to re-use it. If you
require further guidance please write to Raj Seedher, the IT Standards
Manager at [Brent Borough Council request email].

Yours sincerely

Stephen Williams

For Brent ITU

--
The use of Brent Council's e-mail system may be monitored and communications read in order to secure effective operation of the system and other lawful purposes.

Stephen F Williams, Brent Borough Council

1 Atodiad

  • Attachment

    copy response.vnd.openxmlformats officedocument.wordprocessingml.document.docx

    13K Download View as HTML

Dear Sir

Please find attached copy document requested in correspondence with ICO.

regards

for Brent ITU

--
The use of Brent Council's e-mail system may be monitored and communications read in order to secure effective operation of the system and other lawful purposes.

Gadawodd Ben Harris anodiad ()

This request is the subject of a decision notice from the Information Commissioner, number FS50296350:

"The Commissioner has investigated and considers that the public authority should provide the requested information to the complainant to the whatdotheyknow.com email address that was used to make the request. The public authority has agreed with the Commissioner’s view and has now provided its response to that address.

"The Commissioner has concluded that the public authority breached sections 1(1)(b) and 10(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 in dealing with this request."
<http://www.ico.gov.uk/~/media/documents/...>