Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

John Mason TFL'S Director of Taxi's & Private Hire (TPH)has advised me make a freedom of information request regarding the recently published cab related sexual assault figures.

The information i am looking for is a breakdown in these figures to show the numbers of complaints made against:

1) Licensed Taxi Drivers
2) Licensed PH Drivers
3) Un-booked Licensed PH Drivers
4) Illegal Mini-cab Drivers

Mr Mason assures me that he has these statistics and they were provided to him by the MPS, however he is not authorised to release the figures to me, hence my request.

I look forward to receiving these figures

Yours faithfully,

Lee Osborne

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Lee Osborne

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2010100003685
I write in connection with your request for information which was received
by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 21/10/2010. I note you seek
access to the following information:

"John Mason TFL'S Director of Taxi's & Private Hire (TPH)has advised me
make a freedom of information request regarding the recently published cab
related sexual assault figures. The information I am looking for is a
breakdown in these figures to show the numbers of complaints made against:
1) Licensed Taxi Drivers
2) Licensed PH Drivers
3) Un-booked Licensed PH Drivers
4) Illegal Mini-cab Drivers
Mr Mason assures me that he has these statistics and they were provided to
him by the MPS, however he is not authorised to release the figures to me,
hence my request. "

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.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

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

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please write
or contact Peter Deja on telephone number 0207 161 3640 quoting the
reference number above.

Yours sincerely

Peter Deja
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, within forty (40) working days from
the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
[email address]

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 20 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

The Metropolitan Police Service is here for London - on the streets and in
your community, working with you to make our city safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless
absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to
copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of
the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring
legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this
email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are
monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or
attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are
authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by
email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements
reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and
any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned
but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur
during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in
this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). The MPS has a
strict staff conduct policy. Any email that causes you concern should be
reported via the Contacts section on the official MPS Website at
[1]www.met.police.uk

References

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

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Osborne,

Please can you let me know what time period you were hoping to receive
these statistics for?

This request has now been placed on hold until i hear from you and i f i
have not heard from you before 25/01/2011 the request will be closed.

Many thanks

Tom Waller

show quoted sections

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

Thank you for the reply

The statistics recently released by TFL was for the whole of 2009

Please could you send me the figures for 2009

Kind regards

Lee Osborne

Yours faithfully,

Lee Osborne

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

Yours faithfully,

Lee Osborne

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr. Osborne

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2010100003685

I write in connection with your request for information which was received
by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 21/10/2010. I note you seek
access to the following information:

* John Mason TFL'S Director of Taxi's & Private Hire (TPH) has advised
me make a freedom of information request regarding the recently
published cab related sexual assault figures.
* The information I am looking for is a breakdown in these figures to
show the numbers of complaints made against: 1) Licensed Taxi Drivers
2) Licensed PH Drivers 3) Un-booked Licensed PH Drivers 4) Illegal
Mini-cab Drivers
* Mr Mason assures me that he has these statistics and they were
provided to him by the MPS, however he is not authorised to release
the figures to me, hence my request. .

You confirmed that you wanted these statistics for 2009.

This letter is to inform you that it will not be possible to respond to
your request within the cost threshold.
In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000, this letter acts
as a Refusal Notice. Please see the Legal Annex at the end of the letter
for the relevant extracts of the legislation which apply.
Upon receiving your request, searches were conducted within the Specialist
Crime Directorate - Sapphire, the Performance Information Bureau and Safer
Transport Command.
I have been informed that searches would be conducted on the Crime
Reporting Information System (CRIS) and details would need to be taken
from each individual CRIS record to establish what category the crime
falls under and if this has been defined at all.
If there is no clear indication of the type of hire vehicle involved then
the process would be handed over to the specialist Sapphire teams to
ascertain if these cases involved licensed taxi drivers / licensed private
hire drivers / un-booked licensed private hire drivers / illegal mini-cab
drivers from the details on the case files. This would be a time consuming
process as each case would have to be looked at manually to obtain the
information required.
To begin with we would need to look at the free text fields within the
CRIS records for each 'cab related sexual offence' to see if the
information was recorded there. It has been estimated that an analyst can
read twelve records an hour. Therefore, as there were approximately 140
offences of this type in the calendar year 2009 this would take over 11
hours. It may be obvious from some which were committed by taxi / private
hire drivers or illegal mini cab drivers however often these details would
not come to light until later in the investigation. In addition, as this
type of detail is very specific to the suspect it may not be included on
the original CRIS record as a suspect could later be eliminated from the
enquiry.
Therefore it would be necessary to locate and retrieve the case papers of
the remaining cases from each of the Sapphire teams tasked to investigate
the sexual assault. A member of staff would then be required to manually
extract from them this detail. It has been estimated by the Performance
Information Bureau who are responsible for producing MPS statistics that
it would take approximately two hours to produce the list, and between 30
mins and 2 hours of work by the investigating team for each to obtain the
case file and go through it. Given that there are over 100 records for
the last calendar year, it has been estimated that if it only took only 30
minutes to locate and retrieve each file and extract the relevant detail,
this would take around 70 hours.
I have also conducted searches to ascertain whether any reports into this
have been compiled on this topic and have been informed that this is not
the case.
We therefore estimate that the cost of complying with this request would
exceed the appropriate limit. The appropriate limit has been specified in
regulations and for agencies outside central Government; this is set at
**450.00. This represents the estimated cost of one person spending 18
hours [at a rate of **25 per hour] in determining whether the MPS holds
the information, and locating, retrieving and extracting the information.
Please note that any figures for sexual offences related to cabs include
offences committed by unlicensed cab drivers, licensed taxi and minicab
drivers and licensed drivers touting illegally. The MPS is unable to
provide a definitive breakdown by type of cab (involved in many incidents)
for reporting purposes. While it is not always possible to definitively
determine whether these offences were committed by unlicensed or licensed
taxi and minicab drivers any details of the how the victim approached the
suspect or vice versa are used for investigative and analytical purposes.
Section 16
Under Section 16 we are required to provide you with advice and assistance
to assist you with submitting a new request for recorded information which
can be located, retrieved and extracted within the 18 hours specified by
the Act.
We could retrieve, within the 18 hours, the total number of cab related
sexual offences for the past year. If you are interested in this
information, please let me know whether you require financial or calendar
year, or something different such as August - August.
We could also provide this figure broken down by borough, or month from
April 2009. However, please note that low figures may attract exemptions
if it was considered that to release them may lead to the identification
of an individual and would therefore breach the Data Protection Act.
Alternatively, you could limit your request to specific boroughs rather
than MPS wide. If you were to suggest a smaller number of boroughs you
were interested in, for example Westminster, Lambeth and Greenwich, it may
be possible to answer your request. By doing this, it will reduce the
number of offences and associated case files which would need to be
located, retrieved and extracted and may enable us to do so within the
cost threshold.
However, I would like to take this opportunity to explain to you a public
authority's right to aggregate requests of a similar nature from an
applicant. Section 12(4) of the Act explains that requests from the same
person asking for the same or substantially similar information can be
aggregated for cost purposes.
Therefore, if you were to submit a separate request asking for this
information from each borough, we would be within our rights to aggregate
these requests. This is set out in Section 5 of The Freedom of
Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations
2004. You would need to leave a 'reasonable' period between submitting
such requests, which is '60 consecutive working days'.
I have also been informed that another option is that we could possibly
retrieve the number of cab sexual offence detections for FY 09/10, showing
the number of charges, cautions, PNDs etc within the 18 hours.
Lastly we could provide an aggregated yearly total of the day of the week
and hour of the day that these offences took place. This will show you
the most common time and day which these reported offences occur.
If you wish to choose any of these options and want to submit it as a new,
narrower request, please let me know and this can be logged and considered
under the Act. If you have any difficulty in doing so, please do not
hesitate to contact me on 0203 054 4486 for further assistance.
Legal Annex
Section 17(5) of the Act provides:
(5) A public authority which, in relation to any request for information,
is relying on a claim that section 12 or 14 applies must, within the time
for complying with section 1(1), give the applicant a notice stating that
fact.
Section 12(1) of the Act provides:
(1) Section 1(1) does not oblige a public authority to comply with a
request for information if the authority estimates that the cost of
complying with the request would exceed the appropriate limit.
Section 12 (4) of the Act provides:
(4) The Secretary of State may by regulations provide that, in such
circumstances as may be prescribed, where two or more requests for
information are made to a public authority-
(a) by one person, or
(b) by different persons who appear to the public authority to be acting
in concert or in pursuance of a campaign,
the estimated cost of complying with any of the requests is to be taken to
be the estimated total cost of complying with all of them.
Section 5 of The Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate
Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004
"5. - (1) In circumstances in which this regulation applies, where two or
more requests for information to which section 1(1) of the 2000 Act would,
apart from the appropriate limit, to any extent apply, are made to a
public authority -
(a) by one person, or
(b) by different persons who appear to the public authority to be acting
in concert or in pursuance of a campaign,
the estimated cost of complying with any of the requests is to be taken to
be the total costs which may be taken into account by the authority, under
regulation 4, of complying with all of them.
(2) This regulation applies in circumstances in which-
(a) the two or more requests referred to in paragraph (1) relate, to any
extent, to the same or similar information, and
(b) those requests are received by the public authority within any period
of sixty consecutive working days.
(3) In this regulation, "working day" means any day other than a
Saturday, a Sunday, Christmas Day, Good Friday or a day which is a bank
holiday under the Banking and Financial Dealings Act 1971[4] in any part
of the United Kingdom."
COMPLAINT RIGHTS
Your attention is drawn to the attached sheet which details your right of
complaint.
Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please write
or contact Mark Breed on telephone number 0203 054 4486 quoting the
reference number above.
Yours sincerely

Mark Breed
Information Manager
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, within forty (40) working days from
the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
[email address]

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 20 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

The Metropolitan Police Service is here for London - on the streets and in
your community, working with you to make our city safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless
absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to
copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of
the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring
legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this
email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are
monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or
attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are
authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by
email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements
reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and
any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned
but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur
during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in
this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). The MPS has a
strict staff conduct policy. Any email that causes you concern should be
reported via the Contacts section on the official MPS Website at
[1]www.met.police.uk

References

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

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

Thank you for your reply

Naturally i am disappointed that you are unable to supply the figures i have requested.

However, i believe that these figures i have asked for have been produced previously

John Mason, TFL's Director of Taxi's & Private Hire has publicly stated that he has been shown the figures by the Metropolitan Police

Seeing as Mr Mason has seen these figures it would prove they have been collated before, therefore reproducing these statistics should, i imagine involve very little cost.

I would appreciate it if you could investigate this for me and let me know the outcome.

Thanks for your help

Yours faithfully,

Lee Osborne

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Osbourne

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2010110001109

I write in connection with your letter dated 4 November 2010 requesting
that the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) review its response to your
request for information relating to:

* Original FOI case number 2010100003685.

The review will be conducted in accordance to the MPS's complaints
procedure. The MPS endeavour to respond to your complaint by 2 December
2010.

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

Thank you for your interest in the MPS.

Yours sincerely

S. Strong
FOIA Policy Research & Complaints 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, within forty (40) working days from
the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
[email address]

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 20 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

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Osbourne

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2010110001109

Further to our letter of 9 November 2010, I have unfortunately been unable
to meet the response time originally provided to you in relation to:

* Original FOI case number 2010100003685

I hope to complete your review no later than 24 December 2010. 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.

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

Thank you for your interest in the MPS.

Yours sincerely

S. Strong
FOIA Policy Research & Complaints 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, within forty (40) working days from
the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
[email address]

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 20 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

The Metropolitan Police Service is here for London - on the streets and in
your community, working with you to make our city safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless
absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to
copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of
the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring
legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this
email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are
monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or
attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are
authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by
email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements
reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and
any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned
but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur
during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in
this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). The MPS has a
strict staff conduct policy. Any email that causes you concern should be
reported via the Contacts section on the official MPS Website at
[1]www.met.police.uk

References

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

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Osborne,

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2010110001109

Further to our letter of 3 December 2010, I am now able to provide a
response to your complaint dated 4 November 2010 concerning:

* FOIA Complaint on closed request pertaining to 2010100003685.

Request for information dated 21 October 2010
John Mason TFL'S Director of Taxi's & Private Hire (TPH) has advised me
make a freedom of information request regarding the recently published cab
related sexual assault figures.
1. The information I am looking for is a breakdown in these figures
to show the numbers of complaints made against:
a) Licensed Taxi Drivers
b) Licensed PH Drivers
c) Un-booked Licensed PH Drivers
d) Illegal Mini-cab Drivers

You confirmed that you wanted these statistics for 2009.

DECISION

The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) has completed its review and has
decided to:

* Vary the original decision by refusing the information based on
Section 12(2) rather than Section 12(1)

REASON FOR DECISION

I first take this opportunity to apologise for the delay in the completion
of your case, and thank you for your patience.

The original response letter confirmed it would not be possible to comply
with your request under the Act within the 18 hour cost threshold. Your
request for information was therefore refused under Section 12(1) (Cost
Refusal) of the Act.

I appreciate you were disappointed on receipt of the refusal letter, as
you believe that the figures you have requested have been produced
previously. You explained that John Mason (TfL's Director of Taxi's and
Private Hire) publicly stated he has been shown the figures by the MPS.
You therefore complain that reproducing the figures he was provided with
should involve very little cost.

On conducting research into this request, I am aware that John Mason has
confirmed in a recent FOI response that he had incorrectly stated that
statistics to show that the majority of reported cab related sexual
offences were carried out by unlicensed mini cab drivers were published
and available and that this was not to be the case.

The 'cab-related sexual offence' figures that are released by the MPS
Performance Information Bureau (PIB) are for all sexual offences related
to 'cabs' which can include offences committed by licensed taxi and
minicab drivers, licensed drivers touting illegally and unlicensed cab
drivers. It is important to note that the term 'cab' does not solely
relate to 'black cabs', as it can also include vehicles such as chauffeur
driven cars as well as mini cabs. We are unable to provide statistics that
provide a definitive breakdown by type of cab for reporting purposes and
publication.

While it is not always possible to definitively determine whether these
offences were committed by licensed or unlicensed taxi and minicab drivers
any details of the how the victim approached the suspect or vice versa may
be used for investigative and analytical purposes where reliable
information is available.

In some cases, for example where a suspect has been identified and charged
with the offence, it may be possible to determine if the driver was
licensed or not. However, it would require the MPS to conduct a new search
of all CRIS and case files. In such cases, details regarding the licensing
of their vehicles may not have been added to the CRIS system. The
breakdown of information you require may therefore not be held in some
instances. To check on this would still require the MPS to conduct a full
manual search through the CRIS system on all offences which would exceed
18 hours.

On research of this case, I therefore find the original explanation
provided to you, in terms of how the MPS would need to search for the
information requested remains correct. On discussion with the PIB, I find
complying with your request would still exceed the 18 hour cost threshold.

I am able to confirm that the MPS is required to refuse to comply with
your request by virtue of Section 12(2)(Cost Refusal) of the Act. Whilst
your original request was refused on the basis of subsection (1), I
instead find that subsection (2) enables us to better explain that the MPS
is exempt from confirming whether the information you have requested is
held for each complaint, as the estimated cost of confirming whether the
information is held for each suspect would exceed 18 hours to
locate/extract and retrieve.

You were informed that there were approximately 140 'cab related sexual
offences' in the financial year of 2009. It was initially estimated that
an analyst can read approximately twelve records an hour, and so it would
therefore take over 11 hours to read through each report on the system to
identity if the specific level of detail you require is recorded on the
CRIS system but even then in many cases it is not possible to determine
whether the offence was committed by a licensed or unlicensed driver. I
have since been informed many of the cases can actually include well over
30 pages of details, particularly in regards to cases of rape. Bearing
this in mind, I would estimate an analyst would need to be given no more
than six reports per hour to be able to confirm if the detail you request
is held. In many cases it would take additional time to locate and extract
the relevant detail regarding the status of the vehicle (in regards to
licensing) from the case files if this is not clear within the CRIS
report. I therefore estimate it would exceed 18 hours to go through the
140 confirmed offences alone, to ascertain whether information is
held/recorded on the CRIS reports in regards to licensing.

There is no doubt that the breakdown of information you require is held on
some CRIS reports, but it may not be held on all. Therefore the detailed
explanation provided by Mr Breed for information held is correct. Searches
would still need to be conducted on CRIS (Crime Reporting Information
System) and details would need to be taken from each individual record to
establish what category the crime falls under and whether this had been
defined at all.

As it was explained, if there is no clear indication of the type of
vehicle and driver involved then the process would be passed to the SCD2
teams to attempt to ascertain this from the details on the case files. Mr
Breed explained that each case would have to be looked at manually and
individually. This is because the CRIS system does not enable staff to
conduct a readily accessible report to download the information you
require where it exists.

The problems of ensuring an accurate MPS search (using the CRIS system
only) for the information you require was explained to you within the
original letter. For example, whilst it may be obvious from some reports
on CRIS which alleged crimes were committed by taxi/private hire drivers
or illegal minicab drivers, often these details do not come to light until
later on within the investigation. As the level of detail you have
requested is very specific, officers may not have had the information at
the time of adding detail to the CRIS entry (regarding the
legality/licensing details). In many cases staff would need to manually
extract the information from the full case papers often held by different
teams within the MPS, who have responsibility for investigating the sexual
offence. The PIB have estimated it would take approximately two hours to
produce the list of offences and between 30 minutes and two hours for the
investigating team to locate each of the case files and extract the
relevant information contained within them. As there are over 100 records
for the last calendar year, it was estimated that if it only took 30
minutes to locate and retrieve each file and extract the relevant
information, this would take over 70 hours. I believe this is an accurate
estimate when taking into account the difficulties faced in obtaining the
information you require.

In terms of complying with our duty to assist, I believe that Mr Breed was
detailed in explaining how he could try and obtain information that would
assist you within the 18 hour time frame. For example, he advised that the
MPS could look to retrieve the total number of cab related sexual offences
for the past year, broken down by month from April 2009. Mr Breed also
tried to assist by confirming the MPS could look into possibly retrieving
the number of cab related sexual offence detections for the financial year
09/10, showing the number of charges, cautions, PND's etc within the 18
hour time frame. Any such requests would be considered as new requests
under the Act, but have been provided to you as a way for the MPS to try
and assist you with your subject of interest. I understand that you have
recently submitted another request, which is currently being worked on.

Additional under our duty to assist, I can confirm that as a result of
discussions on related issues at TfL Board the MPS is working in
partnership with TfL to further examine the most serious cab-related
sexual offences that are included as part of the 140 offences. If any
definitive information results from this work, the MPS will aim to make
this publicly available.

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. Strong
FOIA Policy Research & Complaints Officer

Legal Annex

Section 17(5) (Refusal of a Request) of the Act provides:
A public authority which, in relation to any request for information, is
relying on a claim that section 12 or 14 applies must, within the time for
complying with section 1(1), give the applicant a notice stating that
fact.

Section 12(2) of the Act provides:
Subsection (1) does not exempt the public authority from its obligation to
comply with paragraph (a) of section 1(1) unless the estimated cost of
complying with that paragraph alone would exceed the appropriate limit.
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, within forty (40) working days from
the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
[email address]

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 20 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

The Metropolitan Police Service is here for London - on the streets and in
your community, working with you to make our city safer.

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless
absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to
copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of
the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring
legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this
email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are
monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or
attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are
authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by
email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements
reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and
any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned
but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur
during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in
this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). The MPS has a
strict staff conduct policy. Any email that causes you concern should be
reported via the Contacts section on the official MPS Website at
[1]www.met.police.uk

References

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

Looking for an EU Authority?

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

AskTheEU.org