Chelsea Football Club Away European Travel

The request was refused by Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

On the 22nd April 2016 Chelsea Foobtall Club issued a statement which read "Events in Paris this year have reinforced the importance of our existing policy of controlling who has access to match tickets for away European games, and ultimately act as ambassadors for the club."

At the time the procedure for collecting European Away tickets was that supporters known to the club with sufficient loyalty points could purchase a ticket for matches in Europe and complete a declaration giving their ful details including passport, travel and accommodation then collect a ticket at Stamford Bridge.

Chelsea now blame the Metropolitan Police for this system and the subsequent modification. The modification requires fans with sufficient points to complete a declaarion then receive a voucher by post, to attend a hotel usually not near the venue with their passport and the voucher, then collect a ticket. Can the Metropolitan Police explain how the new system would have made any difference at all to what alledgedly hapened in Paris (unexplained although the Metro incident is well known) and therefore the thinking behind the system? All it seems to do is impose a burden on Chelsea of letting a dozen of their UK staff have a foreign trip and budredning known fans of attending a place where local potential troublemakers can identify them as Chelsea fans.

If the suggestion is these improvements (!!) relate to the Paris Metro incident how would they have made any difference? Rcaists with or without tickets are not deterred. Those involved were identified and banned by Chelsea although have been seen at Stamford Bridge. If police distance themselves from this fiasco are they doing so because Chelsea Football security is jobs for the boys and a private fiefdom above accountability operaed by ex Fulham Police officers Keith Overstall, and John Cottam?

Yours faithfully,

S Upper

S Upper left an annotation ()

The date in the original request says 2016 and should read 2015.

Can the MPS also explain the discontinuity between allowing corporate season tieket holders to be handed tehir tickets in the UK with the ability to pass on to third parties thereby defeating the alleged object of the policy, and why Thomas Cook Travel clients (again paying higher prices - revenue shared with the club) can be handed their tickets without the rigmarole of attending hotels in foreign locations or vetting.

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear S. Upper

Freedom of Information Request Reference No:2016020000881

I write in connection with your request for information which was received
by Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 17/02/2016.

DECISION

I have decided to refuse access to the information you have requested
under the provisions of Section 8 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000
(the Act).

REASON FOR DECISION

Section 8 of the Freedom of Information Act states:

'(1) In this Act any reference to a "request for information" is a
reference to such a request which-

(a) is in writing,
(b) states the name of the applicant and an address for correspondence,
and
(c) describes the information requested.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(a), a request is to be treated as
made in writing where the text of the request-

(a) is transmitted by electronic means,
(b) is received in legible form, and
(c) is capable of being used for subsequent reference.'

Any request for information that meets the criteria outlined within
section 8 of the Act should be considered a valid request that is subject
to the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act.

The Freedom of Information Act provides a right of access to 'recorded'
information. Public authorities are not required to create new information
in response to a Freedom of Information Act request.

This is explained in ICO Decision Notice FS50191203 which states at
paragraph 18:

'Set out at section 84, the right of access under the Act is defined as
the right to access recorded information held by a public authority. A
public authority is under no obligation to create new information, provide
general explanations or opinions.'

https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-tak...

The First-Tier Tribunal (Case no: EA/2006/0069) similarly stated:

"Information is defined in section 84 of the Act as 'information recorded
in any form'. The Act therefore only extends to requests for recorded
information. It does not require public authorities to answer questions
generally; only if they already hold the answers in recorded form. The Act
does not extend to requests for information about policies or their
implementation, or the merits or demerits of any proposal or action -
unless, of course, the answer to any such request is already held in
recorded form."

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

Your correspondence is not requesting information as per section 8(1)(c)
and section 84 of the Act, rather you appear to be asking questions
seeking an opinion or explanation from the MPS.  With this in mind, your
correspondence does not contain a valid request for information.

Your request is not valid under the Act as you are not requesting for
recorded MPS information. You may request for documentation held by the
MPS relating to the changes of European Travel to football matches.

To enable us to meet your request could you please resubmit your
application in accordance with the above requirements. If for any reason
you are unable to do so, please contact me for assistance or seek
assistance from any other available source.

We will consider your resubmitted request upon receipt as long as it meets
the requirements stated above. You will receive the information requested
within the statutory timescale of 20 working days as defined by the Act,
subject to the information not being exempt.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

If you are dissatisfied with this response please read the attached paper
entitled Complaint Rights which explains how to make a complaint.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please
contact us at the address at the top of this letter, quoting the reference
number above.

Yours sincerely

R. Loizou
Support Officer - Freedom of Information Triage Team
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 to discuss the
response with the case officer who dealt with your request.  

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
Information Rights Unit
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.ico.org.uk.  Alternatively, phone or
write to:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone:  01625 545 745

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your
communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are
here for London, working with you to make our capital 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).

 

Find us at:

Facebook: Facebook.com/metpoliceuk

Twitter: @metpoliceuk