Appeals accepted and rejected by Coventry CC/Adjudicator

Martin H Dix made this Freedom of Information request to Coventry City Council

The request was refused by Coventry City Council.

From: Martin H Dix

22 December 2011

Dear Paula Gordon - Coventry City Council,

Many thanks for your speedy response to my request re PCN's issued
at Cuckoo Lane, Coventry.

Would now kindly supply the following:

The total number of appeals 2005 upto the date of this request.

The number of rejections by Coventry CC.
The number of accepted appeals by Coventry CC.

The number of appeals rejected by the Adjudicator.
The number of accepted appeals by the Adjudicator.

Yours faithfully,

Martin H Dix

Link to this

From: Martin H Dix

22 December 2011

Dear Coventry City Council,

Please also supply copies of successful appeals ruled on by the
adjudicator

Yours faithfully,

Martin H Dix

Link to this

Coventry City Council

22 December 2011

 

Dear Mr Dix,

Acknowledgement of Freedom of Information Request Ref 20037753

Thank you for your request for information under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 which I received on 22/12/2011 00:00.  Your request
will be processed under the terms of the Act.

In line with the Act we will respond to you within 20 working days of the
date that we received your request.  If there are any problems with this
request that may delay the dissemination of information, we will contact
you immediately.

Yours sincerely

Information Governance Officer

Please direct queries to:

Information Governance Team

Tel: 024 7683 3305

Fax: 024 7683 3395

[1][Coventry City Council request email]

[2]www.coventry.gov.uk

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are
intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you have received this
e-mail in error, you are requested to contact the sender

All e-mails are monitored by Coventry City Council IT Security, using
M@ilMeter and Star Filtering Services.

The views contained in this e-mail are those of the author and not
necessarily those of Coventry City Council.

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Martin H Dix

8 January 2012

Dear Coventry City Council,

Due to the Xmas period, which obviously involved holiday office
closures, please advise on what date will the statutory 20 working
day period be reached.

Yours faithfully,

Martin H Dix

Link to this

From: Gilbert, Sue
Coventry City Council

9 January 2012

Thank you for your email.

I can confirm that the 20 working day period deadline will be reached on 25 January 2012.

Regards.

Sue Gilbert
Information Governance Assistant
Information Governance Team
Democratic Services
Customer & Workforce Services
Coventry City Council
Room 21a Lower Ground Floor
Council House
Coventry CV1 5RR

Phone: (024) 7683 3323
Fax: (024/ 7683 3395

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Robinson, Bernie
Coventry City Council

25 January 2012

Dear Mr Dix

 

Freedom of Information Act 2000 - Extension

 

I am writing to advise you that the time limit for responding to your
request for information, needs to be extended.

 

The Act allows us 20 working days to respond to your request from the date
of its receipt.  However, it is occasionally necessary to extend the
statutory deadline, to consider the public interest or where the
information requested is particularly voluminous and complex.

 

On this occasion, the Council needs to extend the response time for your
request by a further 20 working days.

 

I hope to let you have a response by 20^th February 2012, and will keep
you informed of any further delay.  If you are not happy with the
extension please contact me on 024 7683 1201.

 

I hope you feel that our response meets your request.  However you have a
right to make representations about the outcome or handling of your
request – in the first instance this must be made in writing within 40
working days of the date of this letter, to the Council's Information
Governance Team at:

 

Information Governance Team

Council House, Room 21a

Earl Street, Coventry.

CV1 5RR

[1][Coventry City Council request email] 

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Bernie Robinson (Mrs)

Business Support Officer

 

Coventry City Council

City Services and Development Directorate

Civic Centre 4 Floor 13

Much Park Street

Coventry

CV1 2PY

 

Telephone: 02476831201

 

Working Days: Monday, Wednesday and Thursday

 

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are
intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you have received this
e-mail in error, you are requested to contact the sender

All e-mails are monitored by Coventry City Council IT Security, using
M@ilMeter and Star Filtering Services.

The views contained in this e-mail are those of the author and not
necessarily those of Coventry City Council.

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Robinson, Bernie
Coventry City Council

1 February 2012


Attachment Mr Dix Cuckoo Lane FOI Response.doc
44K Download View as HTML


Dear Mr Dix

 

Please find attached response to your Freedom of Information request.

 

Regards

Bernie

 

Bernie Robinson (Mrs)

Business Support Officer

 

Coventry City Council

City Services and Development Directorate

Civic Centre 4 Floor 13

Much Park Street

Coventry

CV1 2PY

 

Telephone: 02476831201

 

Working Days: Monday, Wednesday and Thursday

 

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are
intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you have received this
e-mail in error, you are requested to contact the sender

All e-mails are monitored by Coventry City Council IT Security, using
M@ilMeter and Star Filtering Services.

The views contained in this e-mail are those of the author and not
necessarily those of Coventry City Council.

show quoted sections

Link to this

Martin H Dix left an annotation ( 2 February 2012)

Quote-marks Futher to our conversation by telephone today.

The response received on WDTK site is unacceptable, before requesting an Internal Review I would like to give Coventry CC the opportunity to correct their reply with the details of PCN's accepted/rejected by CCC and the Adjudicator, which included the request for copies of Adjudicaors decisons.

I understand there has been an upgrade of your computer systems which could be the reason for the negative response, however now that the upgrade has completed there is no reason to withhold said information.

I look forward to a prompt reply,

Sincerely,

Link to this

From: Martin H Dix

11 February 2012

Dear Robinson, Bernie,

Since the upgrade of your computer system it should be a simple
matter of interrogating the main frame to retrieve the information
requested.
I advised by telephone that I would be prepared to accept just,
copies of the Adjudicators decisions.
Before requesting an Internal Review I would appreciate an early
response.

Yours sincerely,

Martin H Dix

Link to this

From: Robinson, Bernie
Coventry City Council

11 February 2012

Thank you for your email.

My working days are Mondays, Wednesdays and Thursdays. If your email
requires an urgent response please email Jane Simpson.

 

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are
intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you have received this
e-mail in error, you are requested to contact the sender

All e-mails are monitored by Coventry City Council IT Security, using
M@ilMeter and Star Filtering Services.

The views contained in this e-mail are those of the author and not
necessarily those of Coventry City Council.

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Martin H Dix

14 February 2012

Dear Coventry City Council,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Coventry City
Council's handling of my FOI request 'Appeals accepted and rejected
by Coventry CC/Adjudicator'.

[You state the following pasted from one of your replies.

" Whilst I am able to provide you with the number of appeals
received in total by Coventry City Council I cannot be specific as
to the location that they relate to because this information is
currently not available".

You have advised re upgrade of your computer system over a period
of weeks, that has now been completed.
I have spoken to your office on several occasions and even reduced
my request to only copies of Adjudicators decisions of which you
advised there are 4.

My request has been outstanding since December 2011.

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

Yours faithfully,

Martin H Dix

Link to this

From: Davies, Carl
Coventry City Council

14 February 2012

Dear Mr Dix

 

Thank you for your email received 14 February 2012 requesting an internal
review of Coventry City Council's handling of your Freedom of Information
Request:  'Appeals accepted and rejected by Coventry CC/Adjudicator'

 

The matter is receiving attention and the Council will respond to you
shortly.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Carl Davies

Information Governance Assistant

Democratic Services

Coventry City Council

Room 21A Lower Ground Floor

Email: [email address]

Phone:(024) 7683 2565

 

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are
intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you have received this
e-mail in error, you are requested to contact the sender

All e-mails are monitored by Coventry City Council IT Security, using
M@ilMeter and Star Filtering Services.

The views contained in this e-mail are those of the author and not
necessarily those of Coventry City Council.

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Harrison, Iain
Coventry City Council

5 March 2012


Attachment 20037753 FINAL REVIEW RESPONSE 050312.pdf
84K Download View as HTML

Attachment DECISION 010108 REDACTED.pdf
262K Download View as HTML

Attachment DECISION 210206 REDACTED.pdf
159K Download View as HTML

Attachment DECISION 231107 REDACTED.pdf
353K Download View as HTML

Attachment DECISION 260705 REDACTED.pdf
53K Download View as HTML


Dear Mr Dix

 

Please find attached the Council's response to your recent request for
review.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Iain Harrison

Information Governance Officer,
Information Governance Team,

Democratic Services, 
Customer & Workforce Services,

Coventry City Council
Room 21a, Lower Ground Floor,

Council House,
Earl Street
Coventry. CV1 5RR

 

Telephone No: 024 7683 3305

Fax No:          024 7683 3395

 

[1]www.coventry.gov.uk 

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are
intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you have received this
e-mail in error, you are requested to contact the sender

All e-mails are monitored by Coventry City Council IT Security, using
M@ilMeter and Star Filtering Services.

The views contained in this e-mail are those of the author and not
necessarily those of Coventry City Council.

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Martin H Dix

5 March 2012

Dear Harrison, Iain,

With regard to the copies of parking appeal Decisions you have
provided they have all been wrongly and ridiculously redacted not
least to the utter madness of redacting the case reference numbers.

Every parking appeal Decision is a public document viewable freely
in its original form on the two public registers maintained by TPT
(formerly NPAS) and, in London, by PATAS. Every PATAS Decision is
accessible on line and searchable in different ways.

Coventry Council has no authority to interfere with these public
documents by redacting any of their content.

Please now provide unadulterated copies of the Appeal Decisions you
have provided and ensure that you cease your wrongful conduct in
the future.

Yours sincerely,

Martin H Dix

Link to this

From: Martin H Dix

7 March 2012

Dear Harrison, Iain,

The following may assist you in your task:

Register Kept Under Regulation 20 of the Road Traffic (Parking
Adjudicators)(London) Regulations 1993, as amended or Paragraph 21
of the Schedule to the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions
(England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007, as
applicable
Case Reference:
211047952A

Appellant:
Mr Nicholas Cassian Warner

Authority:
Westminster

VRM:
X622ELF

PCN:
WM68969662

Contravention Date:
02 Jul 2011

Contravention Time:
14:15

Contravention Location:
Penfold Street

Penalty Amount:
£130.00

Contravention:
Parked in a restricted street

Decision Date:
10 Nov 2011

Adjudicator:
Neeti Dhanani

Appeal Decision:
Allowed

Direction:
cancel the Penalty Charge Notice and the Notice to Owner.

Reasons:
The appellant appeared at the hearing before me together with his
mother who was driving the vehicle at the time and reiterated the
points made in his appeal. In addition the appellant produced a
copy of the "Park Right" leaflet issued by the Authority. The
leaflet includes a paragraph dealing with enforcement and states:
"We use fixed CCTV and mobile CCTV vehicles to enforce parking
rules in situations where it's dangerous or impractical for our
CEOs to patrol or where other methods of enforcement have not been
effective ...".

It is admitted that the vehicle was at the location.

I have considered the various issues raised by the appellant,
however for the purpose of this appeal it is not necessary for me
to address every point raised by the appellant.

The Appellant refers to the ICO (the Information Commission) code
of conduct.

The appellant also refers to the provisions of Section 87 of the
Traffic Management Act 2004 (TMA) which requires that the Authority
must have regard to the Statutory guidance issued by the Secretary
of State and published under section 87 of the TMA. However it is
made clear in the guidance that it has no special authority in
regard to matters of legal interpretation and that the Authority
should use the guidance in conjunction with the Regulations that
give effect to the parking provisions in Part 6 of the TMA.

The legislation does not require signs warning of camera
enforcement to be displayed.

In any event the Authority has confirmed that there are signs
affixed to some camera enforcement poles, and the Authority has
produced the result of its survey to show that CCTV enforcement is
sufficiently signed throughout the borough.

The appellant has produced evidence as to the road markings and
contends that the markings do not comply with the requirements of
the Traffic Signs Regulations & General Directions 2002.

The Authority submits that the yellow lines are clearly visible and
relies on the principle of "de minimus non curat lex". This is a
legal principle which basically means that law does not concern
itself with trifles; so that even if a technical violation of a law
appears to exist according to the letter of the law, if the effect
is too small to be of consequence, the violation of the law will
not be considered as a sufficient cause of action, whether in civil
or criminal proceedings.

I have considered the road marking. I accept that the marking is
visible but the lines are such that it is impossible to make out
whether the line is a very thick single yellow line or a double
yellow line. In my view the road marking is inadequate and does not
substantially comply with the requirements of the Traffic Signs
Regulations & General Directions 2002. I do not consider the
deviation from the requirements to be de minimus. The lines are
very thick and they seem to have been painted over so that the
lines are joined to form a very thick single yellow line.
Accordingly I allow the appeal.

I make no finding as to the information in the Park Right leaflet
save to say that, the publication of information by the Authority
as to its methods of enforcement raises a legitimate expectation in
the public that the Authority will comply with the its own
published information. In this case the Authority has given no
explanation as to why it saw fit to enforce contraventions using
CCTV enforcement.

The appellant indicated at the hearing that may submit an
application for costs

Yours sincerely,

Martin H Dix

Link to this

From: Harrison, Iain
Coventry City Council

12 March 2012

Dear Mr Dix

Further to your email below, and subsequent correspondence from you on 7th March, I have raised the matter with the Parking Services team.

They have confirmed that Coventry City Council does not maintain, hold or have access to any such register you cite.

Regarding your point about registers of decisions, I have also discussed this issue with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT).

TPT has confirmed that 'example cases and decisions' are available to view by the general public via their web pages.

I have also viewed the TPT web site, located at:

http://www.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk...

Example decisions are located specifically (for various categories of decision) at:

http://www.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk...

TPT have also confirmed that they do maintain a register of all decisions, available to be inspected at their offices (address can be located via the above web pages).

However, this register is not directly accessible online by the public and the example decisions published clearly do not represent a searchable register.

I note your comments regarding the access rights granted by the TPT and other organisations-who operate their registers under specific (sometimes regional) legislation.

I have further consulted the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) regarding access rights to such tribunal decisions information, when it is held by other public authorities (such as the Council).

I would advise that the Council holds the requested information for parking enforcement purposes and not for any wider disclosure reasons and the exemption provisions of the Freedom of Information Act would legitimately apply, as cited already.

This was outlined in the Council's response, which cited reasons for exemption of certain information.

In summary, the Council responded to your request for information and subsequently reviewed its response.

Further information held by the Council was provided to you on review, subject to exemptions that apply regarding personally-identifiable information (which can include information that allows living individuals to be identified, and does not just include names and addresses), under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Further rights of appeal have been outlined to you and the Council has nothing further to add to its previous responses.

Yours sincerely

Iain Harrison
Information Governance Officer,
Information Governance Team,
Democratic Services,
Customer & Workforce Services,
Coventry City Council
Room 21a, Lower Ground Floor,
Council House,
Earl Street
Coventry. CV1 5RR

Telephone No: 024 7683 3305
Fax No: 024 7683 3395

www.coventry.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Link to this

Adam Rowstron left an annotation (12 March 2012)

Quote-marks Why go through so much effort and call so many people to withhold something so trivial? Unless there is something to hide maybe?????...........

Link to this

From: Martin H Dix

14 March 2012

Dear Harrison, Iain,

Thank you for your eventual response, I will now take it to the
information commissioner

Yours sincerely,

Martin H Dix

Link to this

Coventry City Council

21 March 2012

Hi. This is the qmail-send program at welly-5.star.net.uk.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.

<[email address]>:
Sorry, I wasn't able to establish an SMTP connection. (#4.4.1)
I'm not going to try again; this message has been in the queue too long.

--- Below this line is a copy of the message.

Return-Path: <[FOI #97770 email]>
Received: (qmail 30287 invoked from network); 14 Mar 2012 11:34:38 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO smtp-in-2.star.net.uk) (10.200.12.2)
by welly-5.star.net.uk with SMTP; 14 Mar 2012 11:34:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 4192 invoked from network); 14 Mar 2012 11:34:38 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com) (195.245.231.135)
by smtp-in-2.star.net.uk with SMTP; 14 Mar 2012 11:34:38 -0000
Return-Path: <[FOI #97770 email]>
Received: from [85.158.139.19:54535] by server-5.bemta-5.messagelabs.com id 4D/AF-13566-B32806F4; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 11:34:19 +0000
X-Env-Sender: [FOI #97770 email]
X-Msg-Ref: server-2.tower-178.messagelabs.com!1331724859!13318415!1
X-Originating-IP: [89.238.145.74]
X-SpamReason: No, hits=0.5 required=7.0 tests=BODY_RANDOM_LONG,
ML_RADAR_SPEW_LINKS_18,spamassassin:
X-StarScan-Version: 6.5.5; banners=-,-,coventry.gov.uk
X-VirusChecked: Checked
Received: (qmail 28721 invoked from network); 14 Mar 2012 11:34:19 -0000
Received: from wildfire.ukcod.org.uk (HELO wildfire.ukcod.org.uk) (89.238.145.74)
by server-2.tower-178.messagelabs.com with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 14 Mar 2012 11:34:19 -0000
Received: from foi by wildfire.ukcod.org.uk with local (Exim 4.72)
(envelope-from <[FOI #97770 email]>)
id 1S7mTC-0003jb-OM
for [email address]; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 11:34:18 +0000
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 11:34:18 +0000
From: Martin H Dix <[FOI #97770 email]>
To: "Harrison, Iain" <[email address]>
Message-Id: <[email address]>
Subject: Re: FW: (UNCLASSIFIED) YOUR REQUEST FOR INTERNAL REVIEW (20037753)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

Dear Harrison, Iain,

Thank you for your eventual response, I will now take it to the
information commissioner

Yours sincerely,

Martin H Dix

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Martin H Dix

31 March 2012

Dear Coventry City Council,
Attn Mr I Harrison,
As the content of the information contained in redacted information
contained the gist of the information I was seeking, I have decided
not to pursue the matter with the ICO, however for future reference
that will not be the case.
The only redaction left in place was he appellants name.

FYI, the following is the way you should act in the future.

Dear Mr Dix

Further to my e-mail of 17th May, I have now reviewed 5 of the 6
files
that you requested. I am of the opinion that the file contents
appropriately redacted should be made available to you.

I am attaching the first file relating to one of the appeals in
connection with Somerset Place. Please note that where the
appellant
has written in handwriting this information has been reproduced in
typewritten format.

My reason for sending this first file separately is that you will
see
that there is some information which once redacted leaves only
standard
communication. Before we work through the remaining files to redact
them it would be helpful if you could please confirm whether it is
only
the Adjudicator's decision that you are seeking or whether you wish
to
see the entire file.

Sue Aggett
Service Lead - Legal and Democratic Services
Solicitor to the Council and Monitoring Officer
Teignbridge District Council
Forde House, Newton Abbot, TQ12 4XX
01626 215163
e-mail: [email address]
website:www.teignbridge.gov.uk

Yours faithfully,

Martin H Dix

Link to this

Adam Rowstron left an annotation ( 1 April 2012)

Quote-marks I like this

Link to this

Things to do with this request

Anyone:
Coventry City Council only:

Follow this request

There are 2 people following this request

Offensive? Unsuitable?

Requests for personal information and vexatious requests are not considered valid for FOI purposes (read more).

If you believe this request is not suitable, you can report it for attention by the site administrators

Report this request

Act on what you've learnt

Similar requests

More similar requests

Event history details

Are you the owner of any commercial copyright on this page?