Dear Sir or Madam,

My enquiry refers to your complete loss of the case you mounted to try and ban Critical Mass rides, outlined at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa...

I would like to know how much this attempt by you to intimidate one group of people has cost me and other taxpayers.

As well as a total cost, please provide a breakdown of where the money was spent. As a minimum this breakdown should include:

1) the cost of the initial faulty legal "opinion" on which Mr Gomm's incompetent letter was based

2) the cost of printing Mr Gomm's threatening words (and any subsequent threatening words) and handing them to the victims

3) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the original court case

4) the cost of legal representation during the original court case

5) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the appeal

6) the cost of legal representation during the appeal

7) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the House of Lords case

8) the cost of legal representation during the House of Lords case

I would also like to know whether you are grown-up enough to apologise to those you tried to intimidate, or whether you will childishly try and pretend that you did nothing wrong. A URL to an apology on your web site will be a sufficient positive answer to this question. A failure to provide a URL will be a sufficient negative answer.

Please note that "replies" which involve attachments in proprietary file formats are not acceptable. A reply which is not in plain text format will be deemed to be a refusal to answer.

Yours faithfully,

David Hansen

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Hansen ,

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2008110006682
I write in connection with your request for information which was
received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 26 November 2008. I
note you seek access to the following information:

"I would like to know how much this attempt by you to intimidate one
group of people has cost me and other taxpayers. As well as a total
cost, please provide a breakdown of where the money was spent.
As a minimum this breakdown should include:
1) the cost of the initial faulty legal "opinion" on which Mr Gomm's
incompetent letter was based
2) the cost of printing Mr Gomm's threatening words (and any
subsequent threatening words) and handing them to the victims 3) the
cost of legal advice in the run up to the original court case
4) the cost of legal representation during the original court case
5) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the appeal
6) the cost of legal representation during the appeal
7) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the House of Lords case
8) the cost of legal representation during the House of Lords case
I would also like to know whether you are grown-up enough to apologise
to those you tried to intimidate, or whether you will childishly try
and pretend that you did nothing wrong. A URL to an apology on your
web site will be a sufficient positive answer to this question. A
failure to provide a URL will be a sufficient negative answer.
Please note that "replies" which involve attachments in proprietary
file formats are not acceptable. A reply which is not in plain text
format will be deemed to be a refusal to answer. "

Your request will now be considered in accordance with the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (the Act). You will receive a response within the
statutory timescale of 20 working days as defined by the Act, subject to
the information not being exempt or containing a reference to a third
party. In some circumstances the MPS may be unable to achieve this
deadline. If this is likely you will be informed and given a revised
time-scale at the earliest opportunity.

Some requests may also require either full or partial transference to
another public authority in order to answer your query in the fullest
possible way. Again, you will be informed if this is the case.

Your attention is drawn to the attached sheet which details your right of
complaint.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your interest in
the MPS.

Should you have any further inquiries concerning this matter, please write
or contact KSimmons via the e-mail address at the top of this letter,
quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

KSimmons
Policy and Support Officer
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the case officer that dealt with your request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues and
assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within three months.
The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied with
the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for
a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their website at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk.
Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 01625 545 700

show quoted sections

Dear Sir or Madam,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)'s handling of my FOI request 'Attempt to ban Critical Mass'.

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

Yours sincerely,

David Hansen

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Hansen

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2009010000520

I write in connection with your email dated 6 January 2008 requesting that
the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) review its handling of your request
for information relating to an 'attempt to ban Critical Mass:

* Original FOI case number: 2008110006682.

The review will be conducted in accordance to the MPS's complaints
procedure. The MPS endeavour to respond to your complaint by 6 March 2009.

Should you have any further inquiries concerning this matter, please
contact Sarah Pallen on telephone number 020 71613604 or at the address at
the top of the letter quoting the reference number above.

Thank you for your interest in the MPS.

Yours sincerely

Sarah Pallen
Freedom of Information Policy, Research, Review Officer

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the case officer that dealt with your request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again ***

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues and
assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 40 working days.
The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied with
the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for
a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their website at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk.
Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 01625 545 700

show quoted sections

Dear Sir or Madam,

"The review will be conducted in accordance to the MPS's complaints procedure. The MPS endeavour to respond to your complaint by 6 March 2009."

I don't give two hoots about the internal procedures of criminal organisations. In this particular instance your organisation is a criminal organisation because it failed to respond to my FOI enquiry as soon as possible and in any case within 20 working days, as the law demands.

I refer you to http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/l...

"In view of all the above the Commissioner considers that a reasonable time for completing an internal review is 20 working days from the date of the request for review. There may be a small number of cases which involve exceptional circumstances where it may be reasonable to take longer. In those circumstances, the public authority should, as a matter of good practice,
notify the requester and explain why more time is needed.

"In our view, in no case should the total time taken exceed 40 working days."

Like any other group of criminals you are trying to evade being held to account for as long as possible. Unless there are "exceptional circumstances", which you inform me of, I expect your reply within 20 working days, roughly the end of the first week of of February.

Have a happy new year:-)

Yours sincerely,

David Hansen

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Hansen

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2008110006682

I write in connection with your request for information which was received
by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 26/11/2008. I note you seek
access to the following information:

My enquiry refers to your complete loss of the case you mounted to try and
ban Critical Mass rides. I would like to know how much this attempt by
you to intimidate one group of people has cost me and other taxpayers. As
well as a total cost, please provide a breakdown of where the money was
spent.
As a minimum this breakdown should include:
1) the cost of the initial faulty legal "opinion" on which Mr Gomm's
incompetent letter was based
2) the cost of printing Mr Gomm's threatening words (and any subsequent
threatening words) and handing them to the victims
3) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the original court case
4) the cost of legal representation during the original court case
5) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the appeal
6) the cost of legal representation during the appeal
7) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the House of Lords case
8) the cost of legal representation during the House of Lords case

I would also like to know whether you are grown-up enough to apologise to
those you tried to intimidate or whether you will childishly try and
pretend that you did nothing wrong. A URL to an apology on your web site
will be a sufficient positive answer to this question. A failure to
provide a URL will be a sufficient negative answer. Please note that
"replies" which involve attachments in proprietary file formats are not
acceptable. A reply which is not in plain text format will be deemed to be
a refusal to answer.

Following receipt of your request searches were conducted within the MPS
to locate information relevant to your request. I can confirm that the
information you have requested is held by the MPS.

EXTENT OF SEARCHES TO LOCATE INFORMATION

To locate the information relevant to your request searches were conducted
at the Directorate of Legal Services (DLS).

RESULT OF SEARCHES

The searches located information relevant to your request.

DECISION
With reference to your request for:
1) the cost of the initial faulty legal "opinion" on which Mr Gomm's
incompetent letter was based .
Please note that the Directorate of Legal Services gives advice to the
Public Order Branch on an ongoing basis therefore a figure for this
specific piece of advice cannot be provided as it was in relation to this
area of law advice was given over a period of time.

2) the cost of printing Mr Gomm's threatening words (and any subsequent
threatening words) and handing them to the victims.
Please note that the cost of printing the leaflets was £5.60 however the
cost of distribution is not recorded.

With reference to your request for:
3) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the original court case.
4) the cost of legal representation during the original court case .
The original case in the High Court was dealt with in-house by the
Directorate of Legal Services. Counsel was instructed at a total cost of
£5,519.70.

With reference to your request for:
5) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the appeal .
6) the cost of legal representation during the appeal .
The appeal in the Court of Appeal was dealt with in-house by the
Directorate of Legal Services. Leading and junior counsel were instructed
at a total cost of £24,790.00

With reference to your request for:
7) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the House of Lords case
8) the cost of legal representation during the House of Lords case
The appeal in the House of Lords was dealt with in-house by the
Directorate of Legal Services. Leading and junior counsel were instructed
at a total cost of £28,930.00

In respect of your request it is perhaps appropriate that you are provided
with some explanation of the stance adopted by the MPS. This is because
the nature of your (entirely legitimate) questions suggests that there may
be some misunderstanding. It is inaccurate to imply that the MPS ever had
an intention to prevent the right of any group or individual to exercise
their right to freedom of expression. The litigation was not embarked on
for this reason.

Prior to any 'protest' event, police will seek to assess the possibility
for disorder and the likely impact on the people of London, in this case,
particularly, we would wish also to consider the likely impact on other
road users e.g. cyclists, pedestrians and other members of the public to
facilitate the free flow of traffic for all road users. Clearly that is
made (at the very least) much more difficult if the route of the ride is
not known. The requirement under section 11 of the Public Order Act 1986
to provide information to police prior to an event was included in that
legislation because it is so obviously necessary for the effective
exercise of police functions. The legal action by the MPS was designed to
address how it should be interpreted. It is arguable that, at the time the
Act was drafted, the legislators did not foresee a public order event that
was by its definition so unpredictable. Where doubt exists, as it
palpably did in this case, it is vital that police officers know what the
limits are to their powers and how the courts determine they should be
exercised.

In respect of an apology, I am unclear why an apology is either needed or
appropriate. Litigation was undertaken for a genuine and important
reason. The random nature of the critical mass event and how the police
should carry out their functions under the provisions of the Public Order
Act required clarity. There was a need to seek the court's guidance about
not only the wording of the legislation but how it should be interpreted.
Such cases inform the decisions of officers so that they can police
fairly and responsibly. Seeking the views of the courts allows the MPS to
listen, reviewing and refining its policy in an informed way.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Your attention is drawn to the attached sheet which details your right of
complaint.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your interest in
the MPS.

Should you have any further inquiries concerning this matter, please write
or contact Carol Conway on telephone number 0207 230 5192 quoting the
reference number above.

Yours sincerely

Carol Conway
Case Manager

In complying with their statutory duty under sections 1 and 11 of the
Freedom of Information Act 2000 to release the enclosed information, the
Metropolitan Police Service will not breach the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act 1988. However, the rights of the copyright owner of the
enclosed information will continue to be protected by law. Applications
for the copyright owner's written permission to reproduce any part of the
attached information should be addressed to MPS Directorate of Legal
Services, 1st Floor (Victoria Block), New Scotland Yard, Victoria, London,
SW1H 0BG.
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the case officer that dealt with your request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues and
assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within three months.
The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied with
the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for
a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their website at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk.
Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 01625 545 700

show quoted sections

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Case reference: 2008110006682

Partial Disclosure
Case number: 2008110006682
Created: 11/02/2009
Document owner: Carol Conway

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| General | |
| | |
| To: [FOI #4379 email] | |
| cc: | |
| bcc: | |
| Subject: Partial Disclosure | |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Text: |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Dear Mr Hansen

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2008110006682

I write in connection with your request for information which was received
by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 26/11/2008. I note you seek
access to the following information:

My enquiry refers to your complete loss of the case you mounted to try and
ban Critical Mass rides. I would like to know how much this attempt by
you to intimidate one group of people has cost me and other taxpayers. As
well as a total cost, please provide a breakdown of where the money was
spent.
As a minimum this breakdown should include:
1) the cost of the initial faulty legal "opinion" on which Mr Gomm's
incompetent letter was based
2) the cost of printing Mr Gomm's threatening words (and any subsequent
threatening words) and handing them to the victims
3) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the original court case
4) the cost of legal representation during the original court case
5) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the appeal
6) the cost of legal representation during the appeal
7) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the House of Lords case
8) the cost of legal representation during the House of Lords case

I would also like to know whether you are grown-up enough to apologise to
those you tried to intimidate or whether you will childishly try and
pretend that you did nothing wrong. A URL to an apology on your web site
will be a sufficient positive answer to this question. A failure to
provide a URL will be a sufficient negative answer. Please note that
"replies" which involve attachments in proprietary file formats are not
acceptable. A reply which is not in plain text format will be deemed to be
a refusal to answer.

Following receipt of your request searches were conducted within the MPS
to locate information relevant to your request. I can confirm that the
information you have requested is held by the MPS.

EXTENT OF SEARCHES TO LOCATE INFORMATION

To locate the information relevant to your request searches were conducted
at the Directorate of Legal Services (DLS).

RESULT OF SEARCHES

The searches located information relevant to your request.

DECISION
With reference to your request for:
1) the cost of the initial faulty legal "opinion" on which Mr Gomm's
incompetent letter was based .
Please note that the Directorate of Legal Services gives advice to the
Public Order Branch on an ongoing basis therefore a figure for this
specific piece of advice cannot be provided as it was in relation to this
area of law advice was given over a period of time.

2) the cost of printing Mr Gomm's threatening words (and any subsequent
threatening words) and handing them to the victims.
Please note that the cost of printing the leaflets was £5.60 however the
cost of distribution is not recorded.

With reference to your request for:
3) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the original court case.
4) the cost of legal representation during the original court case .
The original case in the High Court was dealt with in-house by the
Directorate of Legal Services. Counsel was instructed at a total cost of
£5,519.70.

With reference to your request for:
5) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the appeal .
6) the cost of legal representation during the appeal .
The appeal in the Court of Appeal was dealt with in-house by the
Directorate of Legal Services. Leading and junior counsel were instructed
at a total cost of £24,790.00

With reference to your request for:
7) the cost of legal advice in the run up to the House of Lords case
8) the cost of legal representation during the House of Lords case
The appeal in the House of Lords was dealt with in-house by the
Directorate of Legal Services. Leading and junior counsel were instructed
at a total cost of £28,930.00

In respect of your request it is perhaps appropriate that you are provided
with some explanation of the stance adopted by the MPS. This is because
the nature of your (entirely legitimate) questions suggests that there may
be some misunderstanding. It is inaccurate to imply that the MPS ever had
an intention to prevent the right of any group or individual to exercise
their right to freedom of expression. The litigation was not embarked on
for this reason.

Prior to any 'protest' event, police will seek to assess the possibility
for disorder and the likely impact on the people of London, in this case,
particularly, we would wish also to consider the likely impact on other
road users e.g. cyclists, pedestrians and other members of the public to
facilitate the free flow of traffic for all road users. Clearly that is
made (at the very least) much more difficult if the route of the ride is
not known. The requirement under section 11 of the Public Order Act 1986
to provide information to police prior to an event was included in that
legislation because it is so obviously necessary for the effective
exercise of police functions. The legal action by the MPS was designed to
address how it should be interpreted. It is arguable that, at the time the
Act was drafted, the legislators did not foresee a public order event that
was by its definition so unpredictable. Where doubt exists, as it
palpably did in this case, it is vital that police officers know what the
limits are to their powers and how the courts determine they should be
exercised.

In respect of an apology, I am unclear why an apology is either needed or
appropriate. Litigation was undertaken for a genuine and important
reason. The random nature of the critical mass event and how the police
should carry out their functions under the provisions of the Public Order
Act required clarity. There was a need to seek the court's guidance about
not only the wording of the legislation but how it should be interpreted.
Such cases inform the decisions of officers so that they can police
fairly and responsibly. Seeking the views of the courts allows the MPS to
listen, reviewing and refining its policy in an informed way.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Your attention is drawn to the attached sheet which details your right of
complaint.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your interest in
the MPS.

Should you have any further inquiries concerning this matter, please write
or contact Carol Conway on telephone number 0207 230 5192 quoting the
reference number above.

Yours sincerely

Carol Conway
Case Manager

In complying with their statutory duty under sections 1 and 11 of the
Freedom of Information Act 2000 to release the enclosed information, the
Metropolitan Police Service will not breach the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act 1988. However, the rights of the copyright owner of the
enclosed information will continue to be protected by law. Applications
for the copyright owner's written permission to reproduce any part of the
attached information should be addressed to MPS Directorate of Legal
Services, 1st Floor (Victoria Block), New Scotland Yard, Victoria, London,
SW1H 0BG.
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the case officer that dealt with your request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues and
assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within three months.
The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied with
the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for
a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their website at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk.
Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 01625 545 700

show quoted sections

Dear Sir or Madam,

Thank you for providing most of the information my enquiry was after.

I note that you did not provide a total, but I made it £59,215.30.

I note that once again the Metropolitan Police are not grown up enough to apologise.

Yours sincerely,

David Hansen

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Hansen

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2009010000520

Further to our letter of 6 January 2009, I have unfortunately been unable
to meet the response time originally provided to you in relation to:

* FOI case number 2008110006682

I hope to complete your review no later than 20 March 2009. Should there
be any unforeseen delay, I will contact you and update you as soon as
possible.

I apologise for the delay, and thank you for your patience.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

If you are dissatisfied with this response please read the attached paper
entitled Complaint Rights which explains how to contact the Information
Commissioner with your complaint.

Should you have any further inquiries concerning this matter, please
quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

S. Pallen
Freedom of Information Policy, Research, Review Officer
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the case officer that dealt with your request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues and
assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 40 working days.
The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied with
the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for
a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their website at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk.
Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 01625 545 700

show quoted sections

Dear Sir or Madam,

As far as I am concerned some of the information I made enquiries about has already been supplied. I am not expecting any more. I note that the Metropolitan Police are not grown up enough to apologise for their attempts to ban Critical Mass or their wasting vast amounts of my money on this attempt to prevent people cycling where and when they want.

Yours sincerely,

David Hansen

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Hansen

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2009010000520

Thank you for your email dated 10 March 2009. This email confirmed you are
not expecting any more information from the MPS as you have already been
provided with a response. I understand that you have now received the
information pertinent to your request on 11 February 2009, however the
response was unfortunately overdue.

DECISION

The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) has completed its review and has
decided that incorrect procedure was followed in reaching our original
decision.

REASON FOR DECISION

Your original request was received on 26 November 2008, but you did not
receive your final response until 11 February 2009.

I therefore find there was a breach of Section 10 of the Act in terms of
time for complying with a FOI request.

On review of the final response you received, I note you have now been
provided with the full answers to all your questions.

I find it relevant to additionally comment on question one which requested
"the cost of the faulty legal opinion on which Mr Gomm's incompetent
letter was based". I can confirm no cost is technically held for the
purpose of the Act for this question, and I apologise if this was not made
clear in the initial response.

I am sorry for any inconvenience caused by our failure to process your
request correctly in terms of time for compliance. The issues you have
raised have been recorded and they will enable us to provide a more
efficient and effective service in the future.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

If you are dissatisfied with this response please read the attached paper
entitled Complaint Rights which explains how to contact the Information
Commissioner with your complaint.

Should you have any further inquiries concerning this matter, please
contact me quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

S. Pallen
Freedom of Information Policy, Research, Review Officer
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the case officer that dealt with your request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues and
assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 40 working days.
The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied with
the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for
a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their website at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk.
Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 01625 545 700

show quoted sections

Dear Sir or Madam,

"I am sorry for any inconvenience caused by our failure to process your request correctly in terms of time for compliance. The issues you have raised have been recorded and they will enable us to provide a more
efficient and effective service in the future."

Thank you for the apology. Time will tell whether a more efficient and effective service is provided in the future.

Yours sincerely,

David Hansen

nutty (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

By using less confrontational language, you may get more out of your FOI requests. Just a thought.

David Hansen left an annotation ()

Why should people lick the bottoms of criminals?

The language used in FOI enquiries should be based on the list of earlier offences to be taken into consideration. Disdain is the correct approach to criminals and the Metropolitan Police have many previous offences to be taken into consideration.

If/when they become less criminal then they should be treated with more respect. Until they earn that respect they should expect nothing but the appropriate degree of contempt.

It would be wrong for their employers, us, to treat them otherwise. It may not be politically correct these days to confront bad people, but if this sometimes tiring and difficult task is not undertaken then bad people will remain bad people.

Owen Blacker left an annotation ()

Try to keep things polite on here, please, gentlemen.

Please remember that we reserve the right to moderate comments on the site.

Owen (for mySociety)

Looking for an EU Authority?

You can request documents directly from EU Institutions at our sister site AskTheEU.org . Find out more .

AskTheEU.org