All North Yorkshire PCC /IPCC documents concerning police complaints

Neil Wilby made this Freedom of Information request to North Yorkshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner

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

Dear North Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner,

I am seeking disclosure of all emails, letters, meeting notes, briefing notes, reports where Mrs Mulligan, her Chief Executives, or her/his delegated representative, has either corresponded, or met ,with officers from the IPCC.

Please disclose these separately for the financial years 2016/17 to date; 2015/16; 2014/15.

It is accepted that the documents disclosed will be redacted to protect personal information but care should be taken to only exclude information in accordance with FOIA S40 (2).

Yours faithfully,

Neil Wilby

Thank you very much for your email.

 

This is an automated response to confirm receipt of your email, you will
receive this email each time you contact my office. 

While I have not yet had the chance to read your message, I wanted you to
know it has been safely received and will be acted on.

I receive a very high volume of correspondence and telephone calls each
day, dealing with them in the order in which they are received.

I aim to respond to all correspondence as quickly as possible and do
appreciate your patience. Please feel free to call the office on 01423 569
562 if you would like an update.

There are strict constituency protocols that Police and Crime
Commissioners must follow, one of these states that Commissioners should
only help people from their own constituency.With this in mind it
important that you include your full name, address and contact details. If
you have not, please resend your email with this information.

Newsletter
I send out a newsletter to update constituents on what I am doing as a
Police and Crime Commissioner. If you would like to receive my newsletter,
please sign up at: [1]http://eepurl.com/_vz89

Once again thank you for taking the time to contact me.

 

Julia Mulligan

Police and Crime Commissioner for North Yorkshire

References

Visible links
1. http://eepurl.com/_vz89

Civil Disclosure,

Classification: PROTECT

Good afternoon,

I confirm that North Yorkshire Police Civil Disclosure Unit, serving North Yorkshire Police and the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner, have received your Freedom of Information request, and it will now be considered in line with the FOI Act (2000).

The reference number for this request is 454.2016-17.

Kind Regards

Liz

Liz Fryar
Collar Number 4437
Legal Officer – Civil Disclosure
Joint Corporate Legal Services
North Yorkshire Police

Please note my normal working days are Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.

Dial 101, press option 2 and ask for me by my full name or collar number. If using my collar number please state each number individually.

www.northyorkshire.police.uk

Committed to the Code of Ethics

THIS EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHMENT(S) MAY BE SUBJECT TO LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE - PLEASE DO NOT DISCLOSE THE CONTENT TO ANYONE ELSE WITHOUT ASKING JOINT CORPORATE LEGAL SERVICES

show quoted sections

Fryar, Liz,

1 Attachment

Classification: PROTECT

Good morning,

 

Please see attached response to your request for information (PCC
454.2016-17),

 

Kind Regards

 

Liz

 

Liz Fryar

Collar Number 4437

Legal Officer – Civil Disclosure

Joint Corporate Legal Services

North Yorkshire Police

 

Please note my normal working days are Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and
Friday.

 

Dial 101, press option 2 and ask for me by my full name or collar number.
If using my collar number please state each number individually.

 

[1]www.northyorkshire.police.uk

 

 

Committed to the Code of Ethics

 

THIS EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHMENT(S) MAY BE SUBJECT TO LEGAL PROFESSIONAL
PRIVILEGE - PLEASE DO NOT DISCLOSE THE CONTENT TO ANYONE ELSE WITHOUT
ASKING JOINT CORPORATE LEGAL SERVICES

 

454.2016-17 response.pdf
PROTECT

show quoted sections

 

References

Visible links
1. http://www.northyorkshire.police.uk/

Dear North Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of the Commissioner's handling of my FOI request 'All North Yorkshire PCC /IPCC documents concerning police complaints'.

The grounds for complaint are as follows:

1. The claim that there are 7,000 emails between yourself and/or your Chief Ececutive, and the IPCC, over a period of 2 years, 4 months is, on the balance of probabilities, far-fetched. Taking a 200 day working year as a median for public officials of that status (allowing for annual leave, sickness etc) you are putting forward the proposition that there are on average 15 emails every working day to/from the IPCC.

Accordingly please provide ACCURATE figures for the total numbers of emails, broken down into the time parameters of the original request:

Emails to/from IPCC - Julia Mulligan
Emails to/from IPCC - Joanna Carter
Emails to/from IPCC - Simon Dennis
Emails to/from IPCC - Fraser Sampson

2. You claim that is is necessary to examine emails as part of the consideration in disclosing letters, meeting notes, briefing notes, reports. There can be no factual basis for such a response. That is, in my submission, a response calculated to frustrate and deceive.

3. Your S16 offer refers only to emails and makes no mention of the requested letters, meeting notes, briefing notes, reports. Again, that is, in my submission, a response calculated to frustrate and deceive.

4. You have delayed finalisation until the twentieth working day before providing a S12 response. Whilst that does not constitute a breach of the Act it does little for your credibility, given the vexed circumstances existing between us (see para 5 below).

5. The nature of your response to this request will go further to the evidence of misfeasance and discrimination already pleaded in the county court claim (C5QZ21V8) in which I am claimant and you are defendant. The claim is, as you are no doubt aware, listed for hearing at Huddersfield County Court on 11th October, 2016.

6. The response to this review is due for finalisation before that hearing. It would, of course, go further to the evidence in that claim if you choose not to comply.

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

Yours faithfully,

Neil Wilby

Neil

Thank you for your request.

I have passed this on to the Civil Disclosures team to respond.

Simon

Simon Jones
Digital Engagement Officer

Office of the Police & Crime Commissioner for North Yorkshire
12 Granby Road | Harrogate | North Yorkshire | HG1 4ST
: 01423 569 562 | :  [email address]

show quoted sections

Thanks, Simon

Once again. I'm grateful.

Have a good weekend.

Kind regards

Neil Wilby

Good morning,

Thank you for your request for internal review of FOI 454.2016-17. Within your request, the following question has been identified:

The claim that there are 7,000 emails between yourself and/or your Chief Ececutive, and the IPCC, over a period of 2 years, 4 months is, on the balance of probabilities, far-fetched. Taking a 200 day working year as a median for public officials of that status (allowing for annual leave, sickness etc) you are putting forward the proposition that there are on average 15 emails every working day to/from the IPCC.
Accordingly please provide ACCURATE figures for the total numbers of emails, broken down into the time parameters of the original request:
Emails to/from IPCC - Julia Mulligan
Emails to/from IPCC - Joanna Carter
Emails to/from IPCC - Simon Dennis
Emails to/from IPCC - Fraser Sampson

This has therefore been logged as a new request received on 9 September 2016, reference PCC 586.2016-17, and is being considered in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Both responses will be sent to you in due course.

Kind Regards

Liz

Liz Fryar
Collar Number 4437
Legal Officer – Civil Disclosure
Joint Corporate Legal Services
North Yorkshire Police

Please note my normal working days are Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.

Dial 101, press option 2 and ask for me by my full name or collar number. If using my collar number please state each number individually.

www.northyorkshire.police.uk

Committed to the Code of Ethics

THIS EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHMENT(S) MAY BE SUBJECT TO LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE - PLEASE DO NOT DISCLOSE THE CONTENT TO ANYONE ELSE WITHOUT ASKING JOINT CORPORATE LEGAL SERVICES

show quoted sections

Malone, Ashley,

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Wilby

 

Please see attached response to your request for Internal Review of the
outcome of your Freedom of Information Act request PCC 454.2016-17.

 

Kind Regards

 

Ashley Malone

Collar Number 4951

Police Lawyer (Civil Disclosure)

Solicitor

Joint Corporate Legal Services

North Yorkshire Police

Committed to the Code of Ethics

Dial 101, press option 2 and ask for me by my full name or collar number.
If using my collar number please state each number individually.

 

www.northyorkshire.police.uk

 

 

THIS EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHMENT(S) MAY BE SUBJECT TO LEGAL PROFESSIONAL
PRIVILEGE - PLEASE DO NOT DISCLOSE THE CONTENT TO ANYONE ELSE WITHOUT
ASKING JOINT CORPORATE LEGAL SERVICES

 

 

show quoted sections

 

Hearn, Pete,

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Wilby,

 

Please find attached letter sent on behalf of Ashley Malone.

 

Many Thanks,  Pete

 

Pete Hearn
Collar Number 6484
Disclosure Assistant (Civil Disclosure)
Joint Corporate Legal Services
North Yorkshire Police

 

show quoted sections

 

Dear North Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner,

A S50 complaint has now been filed with the Information Commissioner's Office.

The grounds for complaint are as follows:

1. Firstly, the police lawyer finalising the internal review is Ms Ashley Malone. She is a deponent, and appeared as a witness, in a civil civil claim in which I am claimant and NYPCC is defendant. North Yorkshire Police is defendant in another claim and Ms Malone is similarly a deponent in that also.

https://neilwilby.com/2016/06/10/chief-c...

2. Ms Malone's intervention in information requests and internal review finalisations, made by me, since she made her witness statement in that claim plainly lack objectivity and independence. It is an ethical and regulatory requirement that a solicitor cannot continue to act where she adopts the cause of a client.

3. The cause of Ms Malone's client in this particular civil claim includes an inherently absurd Defence, made on 15th July, 2016, that states that no information request has EVER been finalised as non-compliant by NYPCC and that all future requests will be compliant.

4. Since Ms Malone made that witness statement, the finalisations she has provided have all been variously unreasonable, perverse, irrational. No other NYPCC disclosure officer has finalised a request or review since that statement was filed and served.

5. Of those six finalisations (they include NYP and NYPCC requests) four have necessitated internal reviews, two have necessitated complaints to the ICO. Part of each and every complaint is the objection to the involvement of Ms Malone in any matters concerning my requests, whilst the proceedings referred to at para 1 are extant.

6. More particularly, in the instant claim, Ms Malone has abdicated her responsibility under the Act, Authorised Professional Practice and ICO Guidance in not reviewing the information request afresh. The original finalisation of the request contained an assertion that was inherently absurd, regarding the number of emails (7,000) that were required to be analysed and formed the basis of what I submit was a falsely formed reliance on a S12 exemption.

7. This approach by NYPCC, and latterly Ms Malone, is in stark contrast to other policing bodies to whom an identical information request was made at the same time. In each and every other case, the data controllers have acted responsibly, courteously and in a timely manner. I draw upon just one example (see Lancs PCC thread below) but the others are there for any member of the public to see on the WhatDoTheyKnow website:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/a...

8. This conduct and the unlawful, unethical, discriminatory approach to finalising my requests or reviews, it is submitted with increasing force as part of this complaint, is part of a wider and persistent campaign by NYPCC (and NYP) to cause distress, vex and annoy. This is a complaint I have made to NYPCC (and NYP) repeatedly, in writing, over the past six months.

Yours faithfully,

Neil Wilby

Will Naylor,

Dear Mr Wilby

Thank you for your emails of 13th and 15th October.

There is no question or statement within either email that requires a response I don’t think, and so have taken the email as for our information only, but do let me know if I am wrong.

Kind Regards
Will Naylor

Will Naylor
Chief of Staff to the Police & Crime Commissioner for North Yorkshire

Website: http://www.northyorkshire-pcc.gov.uk/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/northyorkspcc
OPCC on Twitter: https://twitter.com/northyorkspcc

Office of the Police & Crime Commissioner for North Yorkshire
12 Granby Road | Harrogate | North Yorkshire | HG1 4ST
: 01423 569 562 | : [email address]

If you are requesting information under either the Freedom of Information Act, the Data Protection Act or the Environmental Information Regulations and do not receive an acknowledgement within two working days please forward your request by email to [email address]

This e-mail is personal and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please contact the sender immediately. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner.
Although this e-mail and any attachments are believed to be free of any virus and / or other defects which might affect any computer or IT systems into which they are received, the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for North Yorkshire accepts no responsibility for any loss or damage arising in any way from the receipt or use thereof’.

show quoted sections

Dear North Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner,

I am not able to identify an email dated 13th October, 2016 on this thread.

The message on this thread dated 15th October, 2016 required a response from the PCC, to the extent that Ashley Malone would no longer be dealing with my information requests, or internal reviews, whilst the county court claim is still extant, and she is a witness for the defendant (NYPCC).

Please clarify the above two points.

Yours faithfully,

Neil Wilby

Dear North Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner,

A response is still awaited.

Yours faithfully,

Neil Wilby

Dear Civil Disclosure,

I refer to the outcome provided in respect of 586.2016.17 and request an internal review of that decision:

The grounds for complaint are:

1. Firstly, the police lawyer finalising the internal review is Ms Ashley Malone. She is a deponent, and has appeared as a witness, in a civil civil claim in which I am claimant and NYPCC is defendant. The claim concerns breaches of the Act, and the Data Protection Act, by the data controller.

https://neilwilby.com/2016/06/10/chief-c...

2. Ms Malone's intervention in information requests and internal review finalisations, made by me, since she made her witness statement in that claim plainly lack objectivity and independence. It is an ethical and regulatory requirement that a solicitor cannot continue to act where she adopts the cause of a client.

3. The cause of Ms Malone's client in this particular civil claim includes an inherently absurd Defence, made on 15th July, 2016, that states that no information request has EVER been finalised as non-compliant by NYPCC and that all future requests will be compliant.

4. Since Ms Malone made that witness statement, the finalisations she has provided have all been variously unreasonable, perverse, irrational. The time, and financial, burden this has placed on me has been close to intolerable.

5. Of those finalisations (they include NYP and NYPCC requests) five have necessitated internal reviews, six have necessitated complaints to the ICO. Part of each and every complaint is the objection to the involvement of Ms Malone in any matters concerning my information requests, whilst the proceedings referred to at para 1 are extant. She had no involvement in any of my requests, or internal reviews, PRIOR to filing and serving her witness statement.

6. This conduct and the unlawful, unethical, discriminatory, mistake-ridden approach to finalising my information requests or reviews, it is submitted with increasing force as part of this complaint, is part of a wider and persistent campaign by NYPCC (and NYP) to cause distress, vex and annoy. This is a complaint made to NYPCC (and NYP) and the ICO repeatedly, in writing, over the past six months.

7. More particularly, in the instant complaint, Ms Malone has either misdirected herself, or not discharged her responsibilities under the Act, as follows:

a. This is a new information request and as such disconnected from any other. That is the choice of the data controller, not of myself. For the record, I do object - and have objected previously - to one information request spawning another. In the case of 586.2016.17 this means that an overcost exemption at S12 can only be applied within the confines of this particular request.

b. Ms Malone simply does not address the point that the total previously claimed as 7,000 emails between the IPCC, the PCC and her chief executive is far-fetched. It requires to be independently substantiated by verifiable data.

c. Alternatively, if that figure is taken as correct (and I maintain my argument that it is not) then a simple breakdown into four users and residuals would not appear, at least to most independent observers, to be too burdensome. Not to the extent that it would take 18 hours (the overcost limit).

c. Further, and in any event, the detail provided as to how the information sought may attract an overcost exemption has to be regarded as similarly fanciful, without further and more detailed explanation from the data controller about his storage and retrieval systems.

d. In my submission, a well run public authority - particularly where it is a police and crime commissioner - the reasonable expectation is that at both workstation user level, and at organisational server level, the requested information would be held electronically and in an easily retrievable format. It is not accepted that a manual search of email records is necessary. Accordingly, the S12 reasoning provided in the finalisation dated 7th October, 2016 is rejected.

e. Finally, the S16 requirement has not been fulfilled satisfactorily and - even if the S12 exemption was ultimately upheld by the Information Commissioner's Office - offers no real clue as to how the information request might be fulfilled to the satisfaction of both the requester and data controller. That would tend to go to the evidence (also mentioned above at para 6) that the intention is to vex, annoy and harass rather than explore practical solutions that support the guiding priciples of the Act at S1 and the presumption to disclose.

Yours sincerely,

Neil Wilby

Civil Disclosure,

Good afternoon,

Confirming that North Yorkshire Police have received your request for an internal review of FOI 586.2016-17. A response will be sent to you in due course.

Kind Regards

Liz

Liz Fryar
Collar Number 4437
Legal Officer – Civil Disclosure
Joint Corporate Legal Services
North Yorkshire Police

Please note my normal working days are Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.

Dial 101, press option 2 and ask for me by my full name or collar number. If using my collar number please state each number individually.

www.northyorkshire.police.uk

Committed to the Code of Ethics

THIS EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHMENT(S) MAY BE SUBJECT TO LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE - PLEASE DO NOT DISCLOSE THE CONTENT TO ANYONE ELSE WITHOUT ASKING JOINT CORPORATE LEGAL SERVICES

show quoted sections

Dear Civil Disclosure,

On a point of order, the data controller from whom the internal review is sought is NORTH YORKSHIRE POLICE and CRIME COMMISSIONER (PCC) not, as you have stated, North Yorkshire Police.

Perhaps you would care to correct the previous message at a convenient moment?

Thank you

Neil Wilby

Civil Disclosure,

Good afternoon,

Confirming that the Civil Disclosure Unit, serving North Yorkshire Police and the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner have received your request for an internal review of FOI 586.2016-17. A response will be sent to you in due course.

Kind Regards

Liz

Liz Fryar
Collar Number 4437
Legal Officer – Civil Disclosure
Joint Corporate Legal Services
North Yorkshire Police

Please note my normal working days are Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.

Dial 101, press option 2 and ask for me by my full name or collar number. If using my collar number please state each number individually.

www.northyorkshire.police.uk

Committed to the Code of Ethics

THIS EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHMENT(S) MAY BE SUBJECT TO LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE - PLEASE DO NOT DISCLOSE THE CONTENT TO ANYONE ELSE WITHOUT ASKING JOINT CORPORATE LEGAL SERVICES

show quoted sections

Dear Civil Disclosure,

Thank you for the corrected acknowledgement. I am grateful.

It is noted that you say the internal review outcome will be provided "in due course".

For the benefit of WhatDoTheyKnow users/readers, would you please be kind enough to give an indication as to whether the finalisation of my latest internal review will be provided before, or after, these unfinalised requests or internal reviews that are currently resting with the Civil Disclosure Unit?

FOI requests

447.2016.17 made by me on 10th August 2016
449.2016.17 made by me on 10th August 2016

Internal reviews

1071.2015.16 made by me on 29th March 2016
186.2016.17 made by me on 27th May 2016
427.2016.17 made by me on 2nd August 2016

Thank you

Neil Wilby

Fryar, Liz,

Good afternoon,

Unfortunately I cannot offer you specific details in relation to the order in which we will be able to respond to your requests. The Civil Disclosure Unit often relies on other business areas to provide essential information for FOI correspondence, therefore the response time depends on the complexity of the request, and the availability of the information.

As you may be aware, there are no formal requirements under the Freedom of Information Act with regards to replying to internal reviews within a certain timeframe, however we do try to adhere to the ICO recommendation of 20 working days, where possible.

Regarding the requests you have specified, please see below:

447.2016-17 and 449.2016-17: I apologise for the current delay in responding to these requests. Unfortunately we are still conducting searches within the pertinent business area and therefore will respond as soon as practicable.

1071.2015.16: A full response was sent to you on 11 July 2016, therefore this has been finalised.
186.2016.17: A full response was sent to you this morning - 4 November 2016, therefore this has been finalised.
427.2016.17: A full response was sent to you on 16 September 2016, therefore this has been finalised.

Kind Regards

Liz

Liz Fryar
Collar Number 4437
Legal Officer – Civil Disclosure
Joint Corporate Legal Services
North Yorkshire Police

Please note my normal working days are Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.

Dial 101, press option 2 and ask for me by my full name or collar number. If using my collar number please state each number individually.

www.northyorkshire.police.uk

Committed to the Code of Ethics

THIS EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHMENT(S) MAY BE SUBJECT TO LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE - PLEASE DO NOT DISCLOSE THE CONTENT TO ANYONE ELSE WITHOUT ASKING JOINT CORPORATE LEGAL SERVICES

show quoted sections

Dear Civil Disclosure,

I refer to your message posted earlier today and make the following points by way of reply:

Apart from ICO guidance concerning timeliness of response to internal reviews, it is a specific requirement under Authorised Professional Practice (APP) that they are finalised no later than 20 working days after being received.

https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-co...

Compliance with APP is embedded in the College of Policing Code of Ethics, which is now a statutory instrument by way of S39 A of the Police Act, 1996. It, therefore, follows that to exceed the 20 working day limit is a misconduct offence under the Code. Persistent, flagrant discriminatory breaches could amount to discreditable conduct under the Code, which is a gross misconduct matter, and may lead to dismissal from a police force of the officer (or directing mind) responsible for those breaches, via a public misconduct hearing.

http://www.college.police.uk/What-we-do/...

WhatDoTheyKnow users/readers will note that every message posted on this website by NYP/NYPCC's Civil Disclosure Unit carries the message "Committed to the Code of Ethics". It is a reasonable expectation, therefore, that you will adhere to the legislative framework set out above.

None of the requests referred to below could be fairly termed 'complex', placing any particular burden on business areas of either the PCC's office, or the police force. The information sought should be readily retrievable in capably run organisations, with appropriately robust ICT and information infratructure in place.

Accordingly, your arguments concerning justification for delay are rejected out of hand, for the reasons carefully set out above.

Turning, specifically, to the long overdue requests and internal requests I make the following further points:

447.2016-17 and 449.2016-17 It is beyond incredible that a police commissioner is alleging that she is still searching for information of this nature, almost three months after the request was made.
Furthermore, I have been to the PCC's office in Harrogate, as a visitor, three times. The premises are compact and, from checking the NYPCC website, only six people work there.
In my estimation, every desk and filing cabinet at her office could be searched in less than a day. Electronic retrieval could be run in parallel and I estimate it would take two to three hours.
If the PCC needs assistance in organising a search and advising on the categorisation of the out-turn, then I am in Harrogate next Thursday and, as an investigative journalist, would be willing to bring to the table whatever relevant expertise I can.

1071.2015.16: I can trace no response. It was clearly marked on the Word table (NYP and NYPCC FOI summary) I sent to Liz Fryar on 1st November, 2016 as not finalised. Comments were invited from Liz on the accuracy of that table. None were received. WhatDoTheyKnow users/readers may draw inference from that fact.

186.2016.17: A response, of sorts, was received this morning, 4th November 2016. To call it "full" would require some stretch of the imagination. It was, in my submission, another ill-concieved, woefully deficient finalisation that has resulted in yet another complaint being made to the ICO.

427.2016.17: The WhatDoTheyKnow audit trail concerning this request, and subsequent internal review, is very clear (see below hyperlink): No response to internal review received. Complaint submitted to ICO as a result on 22nd September, 2016 . Again, this was noted on the Word table referred to above. Again, no comments received from Liz Fryar. WhatDoTheyKnow users/readers may also draw inference from that fact.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/d...

I hope this narrative is helpful, not only to the PCC's office, but to others suffering interminable, unjustifiable costly delay at the hands of NYP/NYPCC's Civil Disclosure Unit. Particularly, with regard to available remedy.

https://nyp-online.victoriaforms.com/Vie...

Yours sincerely,

Neil Wilby

Fryar, Liz,

1 Attachment

Good morning,

 

Please see attached response to your request for internal review
(586.2016-17),

 

Kind Regards

 

Liz

 

Liz Fryar

Collar Number 4437

Legal Officer – Civil Disclosure

Joint Corporate Legal Services

North Yorkshire Police

 

Please note my normal working days are Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and
Friday.

 

Dial 101, press option 2 and ask for me by my full name or collar number.
If using my collar number please state each number individually.

 

[1]www.northyorkshire.police.uk

 

 

Committed to the Code of Ethics

 

THIS EMAIL AND ANY ATTACHMENT(S) MAY BE SUBJECT TO LEGAL PROFESSIONAL
PRIVILEGE - PLEASE DO NOT DISCLOSE THE CONTENT TO ANYONE ELSE WITHOUT
ASKING JOINT CORPORATE LEGAL SERVICES

 

show quoted sections

 

References

Visible links
1. http://www.northyorkshire.police.uk/