Dear Home Office,

I would be very grateful if you could provide me with all correspondence between Home Office officials and representatives of the Byron hamburger chain, specifically in relation to an immigration raid that took place on 4 July.

Yours faithfully,

M C Atkinson

Dear FOI Requests,

I hope this finds you well. Unfortunately the deadline by which you should have responded to this request has now passed. I would ask that you respond as soon as possible.

Many thanks for your kind assistance.

Yours sincerely,

Mary Atkinson

Dear Immigration Enforcement FOI PQ,

I hope this finds you well. Unfortunately the response to this request is now long overdue, even bearing in mind the extension that was requested (until 30 September). Given that this deadline has now passed, I would now request either an urgent response to the original request, or an internal review to investigate the delay.

All the best and I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.

Yours sincerely,

Mary Atkinson

Dear Home Office,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of the Home Office's handling of my FOI request 'Correspondence between Home Office officials and representatives of Byron Hamburgers'.

The original request was submitted on 1 August 2016 - I have since received correspondence stating that the lack of response is due to internal delays.

I would like to request an internal review into the length and reason for these internal delays, in hopes of getting a satisfactory response as quickly as possible and ensuring that others are able to do the same.

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

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfully,

Mary Atkinson

Dear FOI Requests,

I hope this finds you well. I write in relation to the request for correspondence between Home Office officials and Byron Hamburgers, which was first submitted on 1 August 2016. I am sure you will appreciate that this has been subject to an unacceptable delay. Unfortunately, the deadline you set for an internal review expired today, Tuesday 15/11/2016, with no response from your team.

Please provide an adequate response within the next 3 working days. If no substantive response is received, I will be raising the issue with the Information Commissioner.

Very much looking forward to your reply.

Yours sincerely,

Mary Atkinson

Dear FOI Requests,

I am writing with regard to my request dated 01/08/2016 for correspondence between Home Office officials and Byron Hamburgers (case ref 40559). This is to inform you that yesterday (21/11/2016) I submitted a complaint to the Information Commissioner regarding the unacceptable delay I have experienced.

I look forward to reading the outcome of your internal review, which was due to be published on 15/11/2016.

Yours sincerely,

Mary Atkinson

Dear Immigration Enforcement FOI PQ,

Thank you for your response dated 24 February 2017, in which you note the decision to exempt correspondence between Home Office officials and Byron Hamburgers from disclosure as it risks prejudicing the operation of immigration controls.

I have taken note of this decision. I will be submitting an internal review into the public interest test used to arrive at the qualified exemption for this request - this will be done within two months of the date of your response as requested, as I believe disclosure does indeed pass the public interest test.

However, on the basis of your decision as it stands I am requesting the following information regarding the correspondence in question. The information I am requesting is specific to the immigration raid on Byron Hamburgers employees in July 2016, and I trust you will agree that disclosure would not prejudice immigration enforcement operations in general. With reference to correspondence between Home Office officials and representatives of Byron Hamburgers relating to the aforementioned raid, please disclose:

- The date of the first piece of correspondence
- The date of the last piece of correspondence
- The total number of officials from each organisation involved in the chain of correspondence overall
- The total number of emails or messages in the chain of correspondence overall
- The name of the Home Office sub-team responsible for the correspondence
- The total value of fines or penalties for which Byron Hamburgers would have been liable had it not cooperated with the Home Office in this operation

Please supply this information within 20 working days of 01/03/2017, as stipulated by the Freedom of Information Act.

I very much look forward to seeing your response.

Yours sincerely,

Mary Atkinson

Dear Home Office,

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

I am writing to request an internal review into the refusal to disclose information relating to the specifics of correspondence between the Home Office and Byron Hamburgers relating to an immigration raid on 4 July 2017. I have been asked to quote reference number 43063.

No details have been given as to the level of likely prejudice in the event of disclosure. The most recent correspondence from the Home Office, dated 24 March 2017, simply states a belief that disclosure "would or would be likely to prejudice the operation of immigration controls" without specifying further. Attention is drawn to the ICO's guidance regarding the public interest test relating to Section 31 (1) (e) of the FOIA, which states that "it is not enough for the information to relate to an interest protected by section 31 (1) (e), its disclosure must also be at least likely prejudice that interest. The onus is on the public authority to explain how that prejudice would arise and why it is likely to occur." (https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio...). This guidance is based on ICO Decision Notice FS50286261 of July 2009, in which it was found that the Home Office had incorrectly applied Section 31 (1) (e) in refusing to disclose information related to a specific immigration control operation which had already been concluded on the grounds that disclosure would be likely to prejudice forthcoming, similar operations.

I believe that, even if a strong likelihood of prejudice could be proven, there remains a strong case that disclosure would be in the public interest, as it would promote public understanding of the workings of newly-introduced legislation and immigration enforcement procedures in general. It would also help to increase accountability and help to uphold standards of integrity in public institutions, a key argument for disclosure identified by the ICO in its guidance on the public interest test (https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio...).

I very much look forward to receiving a prompt response to the present request for an internal review, within 20 working days of the request, today Friday 07/04/2017.

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

Yours faithfully,

Mary Atkinson

Dear Home Office,

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

I am writing to request an internal review into the refusal to disclose information relating to correspondence between the Home Office and Byron Hamburgers relating to an immigration raid on 4 July 2017. I have been asked to quote reference number 40559.

No details have been given as to the level of likely prejudice in the event of disclosure. The most recent correspondence from the Home Office, dated 24 March 2017, simply states a belief that disclosure "would or would be likely to prejudice the operation of immigration controls" without specifying further. Attention is drawn to the ICO's guidance regarding the public interest test relating to Section 31 (1) (e) of the FOIA, which states that "it is not enough for the information to relate to an interest protected by section 31 (1) (e), its disclosure must also be at least likely prejudice that interest. The onus is on the public authority to explain how that prejudice would arise and why it is likely to occur." (https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio...). This guidance is based on ICO Decision Notice FS50286261 of July 2009, in which it was found that the Home Office had incorrectly applied Section 31 (1) (e) in refusing to disclose information related to a specific immigration control operation which had already been concluded on the grounds that disclosure would be likely to prejudice forthcoming, similar operations.

I believe that, even if a strong likelihood of prejudice could be proven, there remains a strong case that disclosure would be in the public interest, as it would promote public understanding of the workings of newly-introduced legislation and immigration enforcement procedures in general. It would also help to increase accountability and help to uphold standards of integrity in public institutions, a key argument for disclosure identified by the ICO in its guidance on the public interest test (https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio...).

I very much look forward to receiving a prompt response to the present request for an internal review, within 20 working days of the request, today Friday 07/04/2017.

Yours faithfully,

Mary Atkinson

Dear FOI Requests,

I hope this finds you well. Unfortunately the deadline for this internal review, 10/05/2017, has now passed. I now look forward to reading your response at your earliest opportunity, as this request has already been subject to severe delays, necessitating the intervention of the Information Commissioner.

Yours sincerely,

Mary Atkinson

Dear FOI Requests,

I hope this finds you well. Unfortunately this internal review is now long overdue. By law, the Home Office should have replied by 10/05/2017, twenty working days after your department received the request for an internal review. I would kindly request an immediate response, as well as an explanation for the extremely lengthy delays to which this internal review has been subject.

I will again be contacting the Information Commissioner with regard to this request if an adequate response is not supplied within 5 working days.

Yours sincerely,

Mary Atkinson

Dear J Collins,

Sincere thanks for your message of clarification - I was guided by the estimated deadline set out in the previous message. I look forward to reading the outcome of your investigation, and thank you in advance for your work on this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Mary Atkinson

Dear J Collins,

I hope this finds you well. I wonder if you can provide any updates as to the progress of this internal review. Your last message mentioned that the Home Office endeavours to provide a response within 40 working days for more complex cases such as this. I would now be very grateful for any updates you can provide.

Yours sincerely,

Mary Atkinson

Dear M Middle,

Many thanks for getting back to me. I hope to receive a response as soon as possible, but am pleased to hear that you are working on investigating the case.

Yours sincerely,

Mary Atkinson

Dear Mr Riddle,

Thank you very much for your response, and your detailed work on what I'm sure was a very complex case. Your response is much appreciated.

Yours sincerely,

Mary Atkinson