We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are William Thackeray please sign in and let everyone know.

Alderman Ian Luder, Scientology

William Thackeray made this Freedom of Information request to City of London Corporation

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

We're waiting for William Thackeray to read a recent response and update the status.

William Thackeray

Dear City of London Corporation,

Please provide details (where held by the Corporation, excluding information held by Alderman Luder as part of his constituency work) of:

1) Correspondence (including electronic correspondence such as faxes or emails),

2) Telephone calls,

3) Meetings

between the CoL Corporation and Alderman Ian Luder, in respect of Scientology organisations, in the past 5 years.

By Scientology organisations, I mean organisations which promote,
recruit members for, or raise money for, Church of Scientology
Religious Education College Incorporated.

To the best of my
knowledge a list of such organisations would include: * Jive Aces *
Church of Scientology Inc * Greenfields School * Greenfields
Educational Trust * Hubbard Foundation * ABLE * Applied Scholastics
International * Narconon * Criminon * The Way to Happiness
Foundation International * Church of Scientology Religious
Education College Inc * Office of Special Affairs (OSA) * Sea Org *
Youth for Human Rights International * Citizens Commission on Human
Rights (United Kingdom) Ltd

Although I understand from your response to a previous FOI request that Elected Members are outside the scope of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) with regard to information held as part of their constituency work, this information request specifically excludes information held by Alderman Luder as part of his constituency work and therefore this particular exemption would appear not to apply in this case.

Yours faithfully,

William Thackeray

COL - EB - Information Officer, City of London Corporation

The City of London acknowledges receipt of your request.

City of London
[1]www.cityoflondon.gov.uk

show quoted sections

COL - EB - Information Officer, City of London Corporation

Dear Mr Thackeray,

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 (FOIA) - INFORMATION REQUEST

Further to your request of 18 February 2010, and our acknowledgement of
the same date, the City of London (CoL) responds as follows.

This response constitutes a Refusal Notice. The CoL estimates that the
work required to locate and extract the information you have requested
would take considerably more than provided for in the Freedom of
Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations
2004, exceeding the cost ceiling, called (as you will know) the
'appropriate limit', of £450, representing 18 hours work by one person
equivalent at the statutory chargeable rate of £25 an hour.

It is in the nature of your request that it covers the whole of the CoL as
a local authority, police authority and port health authority (and
numerous Scientology bodies). The information you request is therefore not
of a kind which would be centrally held. To ensure that we fully complied
with the scope of your request would involve surveying the filing systems
(in every medium), for each department, employee and elected Member,
covering all document types and checking for every organisation which you
list. The length of time that this would take would be so excessive it is
difficult sensibly to make an estimate, but it would run into hundreds of
hours. We note, too, the Information Commissioner's guidance as provided
in his decision notice (Ref: FS 50238979) as to what constitutes a
significant burden to a public authority in complying with a request,
namely where "significant involvement and coordination of staff across the
public authority" would be involved.

Public authorities are not required to comply with requests which it is
estimated may exceed the appropriate limit. Where they do comply, they are
allowed to charge the full permitted cost. For resource reasons, it is the
practice of the CoL not to comply with requests which exceed the
appropriate limit.

In accordance with best practice guidance, as described in the Information
Commissioner's decision notice (Ref: FS 50203140), after applying the
appropriate limit a public authority is required to provide advice and
assistance, in so far as is possible, as to ways in which an applicant
could reduce a request so that it may fall within the appropriate limit.
Because of the scope of your request, (a) we are unable to confirm or deny
to what extent we may hold information you have requested, beyond the item
already disclosed to you (subject to exemptions) under cover of our
response of 25 September 2009; and, (b) it is difficult to suggest ways in
which you could reduce your request so that it may fall within the
appropriate limit.

However, assuming concentration on certain main functions (as listed
below), which would seem the most likely to hold information if any were
held, we calculate it would take 45 hours, at a statutory cost of £1,125
to locate, retrieve and extract any such information.

For your assistance in considering how your request may be refined, the
breakdown of the estimate is as follows:

Comptroller & City Solicitor's Department - 15 hrs
Chamberlain's Department (including Rates Collection) - 2 hrs
Environmental Services Department - 2 hrs
Planning & Transportation Department - 3 hrs
Public Relations Office - 3 hrs
Town Clerk's Department (files of the Court of Common Council, the Finance
Committee, and the Policy & Resources Committee) - 1 hr

Elected Members - 19 hrs

Please email us or phone with your suggestions as to a refined request.
Please note that any revised request would be, in accordance with the
FOIA, a new request.

If you wish to make a complaint about the way the City of London has
handled your enquiry, please make your complaint in writing to email
address: [email address]. For a link to the City of
London's FOI complaints procedure, please visit the following page:
[1]www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Feedback, at the end of which is located the
FOI complaints procedure. If, having used the City of London's FOI
Complaints Procedure, you are still dissatisfied, you may request the
Information Commissioner to investigate. Please contact: Information
Commissioner, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF.
Telephone: (01625) 545700. Website: [2]http://www.ico.gov.uk/.

The FOIA applies to the City of London as a local authority, police
authority and port health authority.

The City of London holds the copyright in this email. The supply of this
does not give you a right to re-use the document in a way that would
infringe that copyright, for example, by making copies, publishing and
issuing copies to the public or to any other person. Brief extracts of any
of the material may be reproduced under the fair dealing provisions of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (sections 29 and 30) for the
purposes of research for non-commercial purposes, private study,
criticism, review and news reporting, subject to an acknowledgement of the
copyright owner.

Yours sincerely,

City of London
[3]www.cityoflondon.gov.uk
Tel: 020-7332 1209

show quoted sections

William Thackeray

Dear COL - EB - Information Officer,

Many thanks for providing further information in respect of my FOIA query.

I would like to restrict my query to the following departments:

Comptroller & City Solicitor's Department - 15 hrs

Chamberlain's Department (including Rates Collection) - 2 hrs

Town Clerk's Department (files of the Court of Common Council, the Finance Committee, and the Policy & Resources Committee) - 1 hr

for a total of 18 hours.

Many thanks for your assistance with this request.

Yours sincerely,

William Thackeray

Gasson, Michael, City of London Corporation

The City of London acknowledges receipt of your request.

City of London
www.cityoflondon.gov.uk

show quoted sections

William Thackeray

Many thanks, Michael.

Yours sincerely,

William Thackeray

COL - EB - Information Officer, City of London Corporation

Dear Mr Thackeray,

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 (FOIA) - INFORMATION REQUEST

Following your request of 10 March 2010, and our acknowledgement of 11
March, the City of London (CoL) responds as follows.

The CoL is unable to comply with your request by the statutory compliance
deadline, which is today. Please accept our apologies. We aim to respond
by close of 7 May 2010, but will of course respond sooner if possible.

If you wish to make a complaint about the way the City of London has
handled your enquiry, please make your complaint in writing to email
address: [email address]. For a link to the City of
London's FOI complaints procedure, please visit the following page:
[1]www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Feedback, at the end of which is located the
FOI complaints procedure. If, having used the City of London's FOI
Complaints Procedure, you are still dissatisfied, you may request the
Information Commissioner to investigate. Please contact: Information
Commissioner, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF.
Telephone: (01625) 545700. Website: [2]http://www.ico.gov.uk/.

The FOIA applies to the City of London as a local authority, police
authority and port health authority.

The City of London holds the copyright in this email. The supply of this
does not give you a right to re-use the document in a way that would
infringe that copyright, for example, by making copies, publishing and
issuing copies to the public or to any other person. Brief extracts of any
of the material may be reproduced under the fair dealing provisions of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (sections 29 and 30) for the
purposes of research for non-commercial purposes, private study,
criticism, review and news reporting, subject to an acknowledgement of the
copyright owner.

Yours sincerely,

City of London
[3]www.cityoflondon.gov.uk
Tel: 020-7332 1209

show quoted sections

COL - EB - Information Officer, City of London Corporation

Dear Mr Thackeray

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 (FOIA) - INFORMATION REQUEST

I write further to your request for information of 10 March 2010 (your
fifteenth), our acknowledgement of 11 March 2010 and our holding reply of
9 April 2010.

The City of London (CoL) apologises for the delay in responding to your
request but as you are aware the CoL has been dealing with your complaints
relating to your linked requests which have diverted significant resources
from officers' normal work and this has placed a significant burden on the
resources of the authority by both distracting the authority from its
normal business and in responding to your requests in a timely manner in
accordance with the authority's usual high standards.

The CoL has decided that your request is vexatious. The reasons are:

1. You have made over 100 requests to other public authorities
regarding the Church of Scientology (evidenced on the "What do they
know" website), including those which have been directed to this
authority since February 2009. We consider that it is reasonable to
conclude that this pattern illustrates that the requests are
obsessive, manifestly unreasonable and that this request to the CoL
is a continuation of the theme of previous requests, namely
information regarding the City Corporation's dealings with the
Church of Scientology. The Information Commissioner and
Information Tribunal have noted in previous decisions that it is
entirely appropriate to consider the request in the context of the
number, frequency, length and scope of previous correspondence,
whether information received in answer to one request has been used
to ask for further information or clarification in subsequent
requests, and to consider the aggregated effect of dealing with all
the requests known to have been made across the public sector
(refer EA/2007/0088, EA2007/0109, EA2007/0130, FS50151851,
FS50180689, FS50238979).

2. The broad and unfocussed scope of a number of your requests
which have required refinement, together with the volume of requests
made by you and the associated complaints to the Information
Commissioner and Information Tribunal, have imposed a significant burden
on the authority in terms of expense and distraction from our normal
business. The Information Commissioner's Awareness Guidance on the
subject of vexatious and repeated requests states that a public
authority needs to consider more than just the cost of compliance with
the request and needs to consider whether responding would divert or
distract staff from their usual work as would occur in responding to
your request. (Please bear in mind also that the `appropriate limit'
(provided for in the Freedom of Information and Data Protection
(Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004, where the cost ceiling,
called (as you will know) the 'appropriate limit', of £450, represents
18 hours work by one person equivalent at the statutory chargeable rate
of £25 an hour) only represents a fraction of the officer-hours it may
take to comply with a request, as exemptions also have to be considered,
and redaction / extractions and copies made.)

3. Your request for information relates to the pattern of requests
and existing complaints which remain under review together with your
linked requests to other public authorities regarding the Church of
Scientology and the City of London (e.g. to the Audit Commission on 12
April 2010 as a result of evidence given in your related complaint to
the Tribunal). These many requests and complaints relate directly or
indirectly to the CoL's decision to award mandatory rate relief to the
Church of Scientology Religious Education College Inc (COSREC). By your
own admission they manifest your clear intention to reopen issues that
have already been considered by the City and which currently remain
under review by the Commissioner and the Tribunal. In conclusion, with
regard to the above, we feel this request is designed to cause
disruption and annoyance.

In summary, complying with your numerous requests and complaints, in this
ongoing campaign has placed a significant burden in terms of expense and
distraction and diversion of officers from their normal work which cannot
be sustained by the authority. In accordance with the FOIA this response
acts as a Refusal Notice pursuant to section 14(1).

If you wish to make a complaint about the way the CoL has handled your
enquiry, please make your complaint in writing to email address:
[email address]. For a link to the CoL's FOI complaints
procedure, please visit the following page:
[1]www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Feedback, at the end of which is located the
FOI complaints procedure. If, having used the CoL's FOI Complaints
Procedure, you are still dissatisfied, you may request the Information
Commissioner to investigate. Please contact: Information Commissioner,
Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF. Telephone:
(01625) 545700. Website: [2]http://www.ico.gov.uk/.

Please note that the Act applies to the CoL as a local authority, police
authority and port health authority.

The CoL holds the copyright in this communication. The supply of it does
not give you a right to re-use it in a way that would infringe that
copyright, for example, by making copies, publishing and issuing copies to
the public or to any other person. Brief extracts of any of the material
may be reproduced under the fair dealing provisions of the Copyright,
Designs and Patents Act 1988 (sections 29 and 30) for the purposes of
research for non-commercial purposes, private study, criticism, review and
news reporting, subject to an acknowledgement of the copyright owner.

Yours sincerely,

City of London

Tel: 020-7332 1209

[3]www.cityoflondon.gov.uk

show quoted sections

William Thackeray

Dear City of London Corporation,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of City of London Corporation's handling of my FOI request 'Alderman Ian Luder, Scientology'.

My reason for requesting an internal review is:

My request is not vexatious, according to the criteria set out in FOIA.

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

Yours faithfully,

William Thackeray

COL - EB - Information Officer, City of London Corporation

Dear Mr Thackeray,

Thank you for your email of 10 May 2010.

By this email, your request for a review is copied to our complaints
officer, who will log your complaint relating to your request of 10 March
2010. The City of London aims to respond to FOI complaints within 20
working days from the first working day after receiving the complaint.

Yours sincerely,

City of London
Tel: 020-7332 1209
[1]www.cityoflondon.gov.uk

show quoted sections

COL - EB - Information Officer, City of London Corporation

Dear Mr Thackeray,

We write further to your emails of 10 May 2010 requesting an internal
review of the City of London's decisions regarding your requests for
information. In light of the recent Tribunal decision (EA/2009/095) and
your related complaints currently with the Information Commissioner, the
City of London is unable to respond at this time but would hope to be in a
position to reply by the 6 July.

Yours sincerely,

Information Officer
City of London
Tel: 020-7332 1209
[1]www.cityoflondon.gov.uk

show quoted sections

COL - EB - Information Officer, City of London Corporation

Dear Mr Thackeray,

Following our holding reply of 8 June 2010 we are unfortunately not in a
position to respond at this time as we remain in communication with the
Information Commissioner's Office regarding your related complaints. The
outcome of those matters, with reference to the Tribunal's decision in the
appeal EA/2009/095, will be relevant to our internal review. We are aware
that you have been awaiting our response for some time but these are
unusual circumstances and we will formally respond as soon as we can. We
will contact you again before 30 July.

Yours sincerely,

Information Officer
City of London
Tel: 020-7332 1209
[1]www.cityoflondon.gov.uk

_____________________________________________
From: COL - EB - Information Officer
Sent: 08 June 2010 13:54
To: 'William Thackeray'; 'William Thackeray'
Subject: RE: FOI Complaints: Thackeray (6), (7) & (8), wef 11 May
2010

Dear Mr Thackeray,

We write further to your emails of 10 May 2010 requesting an internal
review of the City of London's decisions regarding your requests for
information. In light of the recent Tribunal decision (EA/2009/095) and
your related complaints currently with the Information Commissioner, the
City of London is unable to respond at this time but would hope to be in a
position to reply by the 6 July.

Yours sincerely,

Information Officer
City of London
Tel: 020-7332 1209
[2]www.cityoflondon.gov.uk

show quoted sections

COL - EB - Information Officer, City of London Corporation

Dear Mr Thackeray,

I write further to our earlier correspondence, copied below. We are still
in correspondence with the Information Commissioner's Office and are
unable to add anything further at this time. We will write further to
update you by the end of August.

Yours sincerely,

Information Officer
City of London
Tel: 020-7332 1209
[1]www.cityoflondon.gov.uk

______________________________________________
From: COL - EB - Information Officer
Sent: 06 July 2010 16:11
To: 'William Thackeray'; 'William Thackeray'
Subject: FOI Complaints: Thackeray (6), (7) & (8), wef 11 May 2010

Dear Mr Thackeray,

Following our holding reply of 8 June 2010 we are unfortunately not in a
position to respond at this time as we remain in communication with the
Information Commissioner's Office regarding your related complaints. The
outcome of those matters, with reference to the Tribunal's decision in the
appeal EA/2009/095, will be relevant to our internal review. We are aware
that you have been awaiting our response for some time but these are
unusual circumstances and we will formally respond as soon as we can. We
will contact you again before 30 July.

Yours sincerely,

Information Officer
City of London
Tel: 020-7332 1209
[2]www.cityoflondon.gov.uk

_____________________________________________
From: COL - EB - Information Officer
Sent: 08 June 2010 13:54
To: 'William Thackeray'; 'William Thackeray'
Subject: RE: FOI Complaints: Thackeray (6), (7) & (8), wef 11 May
2010

Dear Mr Thackeray,

We write further to your emails of 10 May 2010 requesting an internal
review of the City of London's decisions regarding your requests for
information. In light of the recent Tribunal decision (EA/2009/095) and
your related complaints currently with the Information Commissioner, the
City of London is unable to respond at this time but would hope to be in a
position to reply by the 6 July.

Yours sincerely,

Information Officer
City of London
Tel: 020-7332 1209
[3]www.cityoflondon.gov.uk

show quoted sections

William Thackeray left an annotation ()

Referred to ICO (internal review not completed within a reasonable time).

William Thackeray

Dear Anonymous Information Officer,

I await your response on this matter.

Yours sincerely,

William Thackeray

CCS - Mail, City of London Corporation

Dear Mr Thackeray

We write further to your emails dated 1 September. Until such time as the
Commissioner's Office takes its decision in respect of your related
complaints, the City of London will not be in a position to undertake the
internal reviews. As we have noted previously, we are aware that you have
been awaiting our responses for some time but these are unusual
circumstances and we will formally respond once we have received the
Commissioner's decisions.

Comptroller and City Solicitor's Department
City of London
020 7332 1633

show quoted sections

William Thackeray

Dear Anonymous Member of the City of London's Comptroller and City Solicitor's Department,

CoL's responsibilities under FOIA are not a favour or a boon to be granted or denied at will; they are rather a legal obligation.

Under what provision of FOIA does CoL consider that its legal obligations do not apply in this situation?

I am not aware of any exemptions which apply here. If you are relying on an exemption then please state what it is; otherwise please continue with the FOIA process as laid down in law.

Yours sincerely,

William Thackeray

William Thackeray

Dear CCS - Mail,

Still awaiting your response.

Yours sincerely,

William Thackeray

Pietsch, Anne, City of London Corporation

Dear Mr Thackeray,

We have been advised by the Information Commissioner that you have
referred this matter to their office for consideration as a complaint
(Ref: FS50347960).

You will be aware that we are currently dealing with your earlier
complaints to the IC and consistent with the IC's approach these have
been prioritised over your later complaints. You are also aware that we
have already published related information on the City of London's
website.

Yours sincerely,

Anne Pietsch
Public and Corporate Law
for Comptroller and City Solicitor
City of London, PO Box 270, Guildhall EC2P 2EJ
PH: 020 - 7332 1633 (direct line)
FAX: 020 - 7332 1992
www.cityoflondon.gov.uk

show quoted sections

William Thackeray

Dear Anne,

I'm not aware of any provision in FOIA which provides exemption for the City of London based on the reasons you have given.

Yes, I've referred this query to the Information Commissioner. That does not remove the City of London's legal obligations in respect of this query.

The information which has been published on the City of London's website does not include the disputed information in this case.

I therefore await your response.

Yours sincerely,

William Thackeray

William Thackeray

Dear Anne,

I continue to await the City of London's response as legally required by the Freedom of Information Act.

I would point out - once again - that there is no exemption in FOIA corresponding to the reasons you have given in refusing to respond to this FOI request, and that you are now (and have for some time been) in breach of law.

Yours sincerely,

William Thackeray

Pietsch, Anne, City of London Corporation

I am on annual leave from the 8-26 November and will return to work on the 29 November.

If the matter is urgent and cannot wait until my return, please contact Loretta Jennings on x 3698 or at [email address]

Thank you,

Anne Pietsch

show quoted sections

William Thackeray

Dear Anne,

Still awaiting the outcome of your internal review, which was due by 10 June 2010.

I trust you will respond promptly, as the law requires.

Yours sincerely,

William Thackeray

William Thackeray

Dear City of London Corporation,

I await your response to my internal review request in respect of this case.

Yours faithfully,

William Thackeray

Pietsch, Anne, City of London Corporation

Dear Mr Thackeray,

I write with reference to your various emails requesting the City
Corporation provide you with a response in relation to the internal
review of your complaint. As we have already noted in previous
correspondence, you have referred this matter to the Information
Commissioner's Office. As your complaint is currently being considered
by them at your request the matter is now in the hands of the
Commissioner. We have nothing further to add at this time and we await
the Commissioner's decision. There seems to be little point in using
officer time in duplicating the process. All correspondence has been
forwarded to the Information Commissioner's Office.

Yours sincerely,
Ms Anne Pietsch
Comptroller & City Solicitor's Department
City of London
DD: 020 7332 1633

show quoted sections

Ben Harris left an annotation ()

This request is the subject of the Information Commissioner's decision notice FS50347960:

"The Commissioner investigated the complaint and decided that section 14(1) of the Act does apply to this request. He therefore requires no further steps to be taken."
<http://www.ico.gov.uk/~/media/documents/...>

William Thackeray left an annotation ()

Under appeal to the Tribunal.

William Thackeray left an annotation ()

Tribunal appeal EA/2011/0082 won:

http://www.informationtribunal.gov.uk/DB...

City of London now has to release the information or provide a reason why not.

William Thackeray

Dear City of London,

Following the decision of the First-Tier Trubunal (Information Rights) dated 18 May 2012, I await the information which I requested on 18 February 2010.

Thank you for your assistance with this matter.

Yours sincerely,

William Thackeray

Pietsch, Anne, City of London Corporation

I am on annual leave from the 23 May and will return to work on the 29 May.

If the matter is urgent and cannot wait until my return, please contact Deborah Cluett by telephone on - 020 7332 1677, or by email at - [email address]

Thank you,

Anne Pietsch

show quoted sections

Pietsch, Anne, City of London Corporation

Dear Mr Thackeray,

You should have been informed by the Information Commissioner's Office last week that the City of London was only advised late on the 17 July of the revised decision of the Tribunal and the timeframe for compliance with their decision EA/2001/0082 which had by that date passed. The Commissioner was and remains aware that the City Corporation was awaiting notice of that revised decision before responding to you.

This email is to update you that I am currently preparing a response to your revised request dated 10 March 2010. I can confirm that information is held. I was planning on responding to you today but this has not been possible. I hope to be able to respond to you by the 31 July, within 14 days of our being advised of the revised decision.

Yours sincerely,

Anne Pietsch
Comptroller and City Solicitor’s Department
City of London, PO Box 270, Guildhall  EC2P 2EJ
PH:    020 - 7332 1633 (direct line)
www.cityoflondon.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Pietsch, Anne, City of London Corporation

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Thackeray
 
Further to the decision of the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights)
EA/2011/0082 dated 25 May 2012, please find attached the City of London’s
response to your refined Freedom of Information request dated 10 March
2010 and the information which has been disclosed with this response.
Yours sincerely
 
Anne Pietsch
Comptroller and City Solicitor’s Department
City of London, PO Box 270, Guildhall  EC2P 2EJ
PH:    020 - 7332 1633 (direct line)
[1]www.cityoflondon.gov.uk
 
 
 

show quoted sections

William Thackeray left an annotation ()

Sent to the ICO and Tribunal:

Dear ICO and Tribunal,

The public authority appears to be refusing to follow the Tribunal's directions in this case.

Instead of releasing all the information which the Tribunal has instructed them to release, they've created a new pair of Partial Refusal Notices, raising new exemptions which have not been considered by the Tribunal.

These documents can be found here:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/al...
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/29...

and here:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/sc...
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/50...

I take the view that the present time - two years after the requests were made, very much after the 30 day deadline has elapsed, after internal review, after ICO consideration and after the Tribunal has considered the case - is very much too late for the public authority to raise new exemptions.

If the public authority did not agree with the Tribunal's decision then the proper course would have been for them to lodge an appeal with the Upper Tribunal; they have not done so. Instead they are simply choosing not to comply with the Tribunal's decision.

I ask, for the third time, that enforcement action be taken by the Tribunal or the ICO against the public authority. Given the public authority's apparent determination not to release the disputed information even after being asked to do so by the ICO, perhaps it would be appropriate at this stage for the public authority's apparent contempt of court to be declared to the High Court.

Kind regards,
William.

William Thackeray

Dear City of London Corporation,

Thank you for your eventual reply, dated 31 July 2012, to my freedom of information query of 18 February 2010.

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

I am writing to request an internal review of City of London Corporation's handling of my FOI request 'Alderman Ian Luder, Scientology'.

The reasons for my internal review request are:

1) The City of London now relies upon new exemptions which it has not raised at any previous time during this FOIA query's progress through the original FOIA timeline, your original internal review process, the ICO investigation and decision notice, or the Tribunal case. It is too late for the public authority to raise additional exemptions at this stage; such exemptions should have been raised at the appropriate time, which was March 2010. The information should therefore be released in full.

2) Concerning the substance of the query: Mr Luder's email of 15 December 2009, in which he asserts that he has not met with Scientology representatives except for a single occasion in September, appears to be in error.
In this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDnRqeODu8E
Mr Luder can be seen in October 2006 at Scientology's new London HQ, making the opening speech for the newly refurbished property at Queen Victoria Street (for which the City of London gives Scientology substantial tax relief).
In this video, Mr Luder refers to "the representatives of the Church, with whom I've had the pleasure of working over the past several months".
It therefore seems likely that further records exist; I would ask that a more thorough search be conducted.

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

Yours faithfully,

William Thackeray

COL - EB - Information Officer, City of London Corporation

Dear Mr Thackeray,

The City of London acknowledges your request for internal review of 1 August 2012.

The City of London aims to respond to FOI complaints within 20 working days from the first working day after receiving the complaint, in accordance with its FOI complaints procedure.

Yours sincerely,

City of London
Tel: 020-7332 1209
www.cityoflondon.gov.uk

show quoted sections

COL - EB - Information Officer, City of London Corporation

Dear Mr Thackeray,

Thank you for your two emails of 1 August 2012 (receipt of which was acknowledged by the City of London (CoL) on 2 August) complaining about our responses to your two requests of 10 March 2010 and 24 October 2010.

First, on a technical point, I note that you describe the request of 10 March 2010 as being dated 18 February 2010. We duly responded to the request of 18 February on 9 March 2010, with an appropriate limit refusal. Therefore this is not the request at issue. The request at issue is your revised request of 10 March 2010 following on from that refusal and which was legally a new request.

Secondly, I note your use of the word "eventual" with regard to our response to your request of 10 March 2010. The Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) contains processes which may be legitimately followed in responding to information requests (such as the application of exemptions) as well as making provision for challenging decisions. While the CoL's refusals of your requests of 10 March and 24 October 2010 were upheld by the Information Commissioner, they were not upheld by the Tribunal (when the matters were finally heard after being stayed for some time). Nevertheless, the Tribunal still considered that the Commissioner was correct in determining that the requests could fairly be judged to have fallen under section 14 in the context of all the requests that you had submitted to the CoL in respect of scientology. I take this as strongly indicating that those initial refusals of the CoL were not frivolous and represented a reasonable and proportionate use of the Act. I would also maintain that any delays in considering your requests which have ensued were equally understandable.

I shall now move on to your two complaints, which have been passed to me to consider.

With regard to Mr Luder's appearances, I confirm that the only information held which falls within your request is that referred to in the CoL's response of 31 July 2012. Mr Luder's appearances anywhere in any capacity as an elected representative (of the Ward within which the COSREC building is sited), or any other non-official capacity, at any time, are not the concern of the CoL. As has also previously been made clear, information held by Mr Luder in his capacity as an elected representative is outside the scope of the FOIA.

With regard to the other part of your complaints, duplicated by you in relation to the CoL's responses to each request, I do not uphold your complaints. You state that the CoL should not raise any new exemptions. However, your argument in support of your complaint is exactly the opposite of that which legally applies. The decision of the Tribunal (EA/2011/0082 & 0083) is clear. With regard to the information requested, it directs the CoL to "either disclose [the requested information] or issue an appropriate refusal notice explaining why it says that the requested information was not disclosable at the time the request was made." That has been done.

Should you consider that your complaints have not been properly responded to, you can complain to the Information Commissioner:
Information Commissioner, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF.
Telephone: (01625) 545700
Website: www.ico.gov.uk/<http://www.ico.gov.uk/>

Yours sincerely,

Peter Nelson
Assistant Town Clerk
City of London
T: 020-7332 1413
www.cityoflondon.gov.uk<http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk>

show quoted sections

We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are William Thackeray please sign in and let everyone know.