Documents missing, Risk categories and Dame Julie's media diary

[Name Removed] (Account suspended) made this Freedom of Information request to Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

The request was successful.

[Name Removed] (Account suspended)

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,

Dear Mr Whiting,

* Documents referred to will not reproduce, sent by email.

1.
Thank you for you help in providing me with information. However, there seem to be documents missing from those sent.

I refer to all documents on file (see page below) written by Joslyn Gooding. As you will know the FoI covers all documents .....and not just those that support the non-review of my case by Ms Beazley.

Clearly I would like to also read Ms Beazley's reasons for declining the review proposal in regard to Joslyn Gooding' proposal.

(As you will be aware, notes of any meetings as well as documents must be provided.)

If you have withheld any other documents that do not comply with the proposal to review my case, then clearly I would like to read these as well.

As there seem to be quite a few documents missing from this casework list.....If you cannot supply them, my understanding is that you have to give me the reason why.

2. I would also like to read the documents referred to as

'not added to the assessment' ....

and those concerning my case from the ICO in the following document.

Obviously I would want to be assured that if some went missing, then others may have done so to. Particularly as there is no absolutely reference to the public interest issues on which a major part of my case depended.

3. I would also like to know why my my case was raised from low risk to medium risk..'to take into account the risk to our reputation '.

What is the PHSO risk scale? And how does this mesh with 'protecting its reputation'?

NB.. I already understand that one risk to the PHSO's reputation was that it is now plain that neither the ICO or the PHSO has ever complied with the Data Protection Act in considering the Public Interest argument on my case.

However, it appears that this 'risk to reputation' mentioned below, is not centred on the case itself. But to my response to it.

4.
I would also like details of Dame Julie Mellor's media ( any contacts with press and TV, radio etc) and Parliamentary diary ....for the next year.

As Dame Julie is a public figure, yet uncontactable, it seems that my case, ( as in the current Private Eye) and the cases of the others are best explained in public. Particularly as Dame Julie Mellor is attempting to expand her remit into private healthcare.

I would therefore like the opportunity to explain how the PHSO has failed me ( and numerous others....who may also wish to air their views) in response to Dame Julie Mellor's public point of view, given in the media, or to any Parliamentary committees, which, I'm sure Dame Julie Mellor will agree, is a free and frank exchange of views on the future if the PhSO, is in the public interest.

Yours faithfully,

[Name Removed]

foiofficer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service
Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your
correspondence.

show quoted sections

All email communications with PHSO pass through the Government Secure
Intranet, and may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for
legal purposes.
The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to achieve
the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007), the UK
Government quality mark initiative for information security products and
services. For more information about this please visit www.cctmark.gov.uk

foiofficer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

1 Attachment

Dear [Name Removed]

'1.
Thank you for you help in providing me with information. However, there seem to be documents missing from those sent.

I refer to all documents on file (see page below) written by Joslyn Gooding. As you will know the FoI covers all documents .....and not just those that support the non-review of my case by Ms Beazley.

Clearly I would like to also read Ms Beazley's reasons for declining the review proposal in regard to Joslyn Gooding' proposal.

(As you will be aware, notes of any meetings as well as documents must be provided.)

If you have withheld any other documents that do not comply with the proposal to review my case, then clearly I would like to read these as well.

As there seem to be quite a few documents missing from this casework list.....If you cannot supply them, my understanding is that you have to give me the reason why.'

‘Whatdotheyknow.com’ is a website for hosting Freedom of Information requests. It is not an appropriate forum for discussing individual cases. Our response to this part of your request will be sent to your personal email address.

'2. I would also like to read the documents referred to as

'not added to the assessment' ....

and those concerning my case from the ICO in the following document.'

Please see above.

'3. I would also like to know why my my case was raised from low risk to medium risk..'to take into account the risk to our reputation '.

What is the PHSO risk scale? And how does this mesh with 'protecting its reputation'?'

Please see above.

I have attached a copy of PHSO’s ‘Risk assessment in casework’ to help you understand how we assess risk.

Your question ‘how does this mesh with “protecting its reputation”?’ is not a request for recorded information. While we try to be helpful, the Freedom of Information Act 2000 provides the requester with an access right to recorded information held by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. It does not extend, for example, to requests for views or comments about a particular matter. Your request can be in the form of a question, but we do not have to answer your question if this would mean creating new information, providing analysis or giving an opinion or judgment that is not already recorded.

'4.
I would also like details of Dame Julie Mellor's media ( any contacts with press and TV, radio etc) and Parliamentary diary ....for the next year.'

The majority of Dame Julie’s media work is in response to reports that we publish or events that we react to. For example, we may have an interview request following something that happens in the NHS which we choose to respond to. This activity is not pre-planned and is simply reactive to the news. We will occasionally arrange for Dame Julie to meet with journalists so that she can brief them on the work of the office and help them to better understand our role. This provides journalists with a context so that when we publish a report they know where it is coming from and have a better understanding of what it means. Dame Julie is scheduled to meet with Branwen Jeffreys, BBC Health Correspondent, later this month. Her diary is such that we do not plan very far in advance. If we did, it is likely to change so often as to make it unmanageable.

I hope you find this information and explanations helpful.

Yours sincerely

FOI/DP Officer
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

show quoted sections

[Name Removed] (Account suspended)

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman's handling of my FOI request 'Documents missing, Risk categories and Dame Julie's media diary'.

On 9 Sep 2013, at 13:57, foiofficer <[email address]> wrote:

PROTECT

Dear Ms [first name redacted] Oakley

I am writing in response to your email we received via WhatDoTheyKnow.com on 10 August 2013.

1.
Thank you for you help in providing me with information. However, there seem to be documents missing from those sent.

I refer to all documents on file (see page below) written by Joslyn Gooding. As you will know the FoI covers all documents .....and not just those that support the non-review of my case by Ms Beazley.

Clearly I would like to also read Ms Beazley's reasons for declining the review proposal in regard to Joslyn Gooding' proposal.

(As you will be aware, notes of any meetings as well as documents must be provided.)

If you have withheld any other documents that do not comply with the proposal to review my case, then clearly I would like to read these as well.

As there seem to be quite a few documents missing from this casework list.....If you cannot supply them, my understanding is that you have to give me the reason why.

I have enclosed a signed copy of the review proposals authored by Joslyn Gooding.

We have provided you with all of the information we hold on your file up until the date of your previous subject access request. Furthermore, we provided you with an explanation as to why we redacted a small amount of information from the material we released to you in our letter of 14 November 2012.

As we have previously explained, if you are dissatisfied with our handling of your information request, you can ask for a review by writing to our Review Team at [email address]

::::::::
Review:
JTO:

ALL the documents missing as per your list please, not just one Joslyn Gooding document.
(There are seven listed by JG). As well as others by other employees.

Why send me 20+ blank pages? Was there anything on them? No information given.

But thank you for providing that document.,as it confirms what I had already suspected ..that at no point did either the PHSO or the ICO evaluate my complaint, as requested, in terms of 'public interest'.

::::::::

If you still remain dissatisfied, you can take your complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office www.ico.org.uk/Global/contact_us

2. I would also like to read the documents referred to as

'not added to the assessment' ....

and those concerning my case from the ICO in the following document.

Obviously I would want to be assured that if some went missing, then others may have done so to. Particularly as there is no absolutely reference to the public interest issues on which a major part of my case depended.

Please see above.

:::::::

JTO:

Please see above. ALL missing documents, not just the one attached below.

::::::::

3. I would also like to know why my my case was raised from low risk to medium risk..'to take into account the risk to our reputation '.

What is the PHSO risk scale? And how does this mesh with 'protecting its reputation'?

NB.. I already understand that one risk to the PHSO's reputation was that it is now plain that neither the ICO or the PHSO has ever complied with the Data Protection Act in considering the Public Interest argument on my case.

However, it appears that this 'risk to reputation' mentioned below, is not centred on the case itself. But to my response to it.

Ans: The risk rating on your case, our reference EN-137210, has been assessed three times. Each time the risk has been assessed as ‘low’.

I have provided you with some further information about how PHSO assesses risk in our response to your request made via WhatDoTheyKnow.

::::::::::

JTO:

I was directly quoting from the document that was sent to me. Please see last paragraph.

However, I would point out that these 'assesments' have not been supplied in the returned documents. Please therefore supply.

::::::::

I would also like details of Dame Julie Mellor's media ( any contacts with press and TV, radio etc) and Parliamentary diary ....for the next year.

As Dame Julie is a public figure, yet uncontactable, it seems that my case, ( as in the current Private Eye) and the cases of the others are best explained in public. Particularly as Dame Julie Mellor is attempting to expand her remit into private healthcare.

I would therefore like the opportunity to explain how the PHSO has failed me ( and numerous others....who may also wish to air their views) in response to Dame Julie Mellor's public point of view, given in the media, or to any Parliamentary committees, which, I'm sure Dame Julie Mellor will agree, is a free and frank exchange of views on the future if the PhSO, is in the public interest.

Ans; I have responded to your request about Dame Julie’s media commitments in our response to your request made via WhatDoTheyKnow.

.......The majority of Dame Julie’s media work is in response to reports that we publish or events that we react to. For example, we may have an interview request following something that happens in the NHS which we choose to respond to. This activity is not pre-planned and is simply reactive to the news. We will occasionally arrange for Dame Julie to meet with journalists so that she can brief them on the work of the office and help them to better understand our role. This provides journalists with a context so that when we publish a report they know where it is coming from and have a better understanding of what it means. Dame Julie is scheduled to meet with Branwen Jeffreys, BBC Health Correspondent, later this month. Her diary is such that we do not plan very far in advance. If we did, it is likely to change so often as to make it unmanageable.

:::::::

JTO:
You have not answered my request to be informed when Dame Julie Mellor has diarised meetings with any elected representatives.

So you appear to be stating that Dame Julie Mellor has no Parliamentary meetings or engagements.

Are you sure that Dame Julie Mellor has no idea when she might be meeting MP's, or attending any Parliamentary committees?

And you also appear to be suggesting that there is no pre-planning as regards contact with the media( except one appointment). But you use the term 'majority' as applied to media work, so presumably you know of some. Perhaps you would care to state what they are, since it is in the terms of the request.

And you also appear to be suggesting that the PHSO Media Advisor, with his/her a staff of nine, is never pro-active in media matters....just waits until something crops up and hopes for the best in fitting Dame Julie Mellor's important commitments in with press interest.

I find it hard to believe that the PHSO is so shambolic in its attitude to both communicating with Parliamentary representatives and the public at large.

I would therefore be obliged if you therefore please check Dame Julie Mellor's diary again.

::::::::::

Ans:
Finally, I would like to suggest that before making any further requests for information to PHSO, you read the guidance on the ICO’s website about ‘How to access information from a public body’ (www.ico.org.uk/for_the_public/official_information). You may also be interested to read the guidance on WhatDoTheyKnow.com about making requests (www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/requesting).

In particular, I would like to refer you to what the ICO has to say about using the Freedom of Information Act to reopen grievances which have already been fully addressed by the authority, or subjected to independent investigation with no evidence of wrongdoing being found. I would also like to refer you to what it says on WhatDoTheyKnow under the heading ‘Can I request information about myself?’

Yours sincerely

Jim McKenzie
FOI/DP Officer
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
Please contact the FOI/DP Team at [email address]

::::::::

JTO:

Thank you for your suggestion .....but if I want advice, I will ask the owners of WDTK.

However, as a former company communications advisor, I will give you a suggestion...

At least try to look as if you are answering requests.

I would suggest that the PHSO team attempts to read the request carefully and apply themselves to answering that which is asked - instead of constructing its own requests and answering them instead.

It just doesn't do in these days of 'openness, transparency and candour'.

I hope you find this information and explanations helpful.

::::::::

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

Yours faithfully,

[Name Removed]

foiofficer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service
Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your
correspondence.

show quoted sections

All email communications with PHSO pass through the Government Secure
Intranet, and may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for
legal purposes.
The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to achieve
the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007), the UK
Government quality mark initiative for information security products and
services. For more information about this please visit www.cctmark.gov.uk

[Name Removed] (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

The Queen publishes her diary....

[.....Details of official engagements to be undertaken by members of the Royal Family are published up to eight weeks in advance. Information available varies from engagement to engagement, depending on factors such as security......] Buck P website

Nb..According the FOI answer above , Dame Julie apparently thinks that keeping her official diary secret is more essential than that of the Queen's.

[Name Removed] (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Ooh ..reported for asking about risk assessments and Dame julie's diary.

foiofficer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

3 Attachments

 

Dear Ms [first name redacted] Oakley,

 

Thank you for your email of 9 September 2013 in relation to your
information request FDN-177445 heading ‘'Documents missing, Risk
categories and Dame Julie's media diary'.

 

You are concerned that we have not properly responded to your request for
information about meetings Dame Julie Mellor DBE has scheduled with
Members of Parliament. You are also concerned that we have not provided
all of the information you requested from your case file.

 

While your concerns will shortly be the subject of an internal review,
before then I wanted to look again at the points you raised to see whether
there was more information we could give you.

 

I will respond to you privately about the points you make about the
information from your case file. Here I will address your concerns about
information relating to Dame Julie’s diary and specifically your request
to know of the ‘diarised meetings with any elected representatives’ she
has planned.

 

Having looked again at our response to this request I can see that while
we provided you with an explanation about Dame Julie’s media diary, we
omitted the information you had asked for about her Parliamentary Diary. I
provide this information below.  I am sorry that this was not given to you
before and for any additional frustration this caused you.

 

By way of background, Dame Julie will meet with MPs on individual
complaints that concern their constituents as and when the need arises.
These cannot be programmed in to her diary because it depends on the cases
that come to us and whether it is necessary and/or proper to involve the
complainant’s MP.

 

She may also meet with other MPs from time to time if they have particular
comments on our service or they have a particular interest in us from a
constitutional point of view.

 

Beyond this, Dame Julie meets quarterly with Bernard Jenkin MP in his role
as Chair of the Public Administration Select Committee (PASC) who
scrutinise our work on behalf of Parliament. She may also meet with
individual committee members as and when the need arises. Though Dame
Julie appears publically before PASC on an annual basis to discuss our
annual report, the timing of this is determined by the Committee depending
on other inquiries that they may be conducting. Dame Julie may also appear
before other Parliamentary Committees to give evidence to their various
inquiries but again this is determined by the Committees themselves.

 

She will also meet with the Chairs of other select committees to share
themes arising in our casework to help them with their function. For
example the Health Committee, the Home Affairs Committee and the Committee
for Work and Pensions. 

 

Finally, she will meet with Ministers of various departments to share the
learning from our casework and to help improve public services. Examples
of this are Norman Lamb, Minister for Health, on the NHS Constitution and
strengthening the role of complaints within the constitution. She also met
with Jeremy Hunt following the publication of the Mid Staffs report.

 

I can confirm that between now and the end of the year she is scheduled to
meet with the following MPs:

 

·         Dan Poulter, Minister for Health, 8 October 2013

·         Helen Grant, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Justice,
10 October

·         Dan Rouffley, 10 October

·         Bernard Jenkin, Chair of PASC, quarterly meetings on 10 October
and 27 November.

·         Keith Vaz, Chair of Home Affairs on 17 October

·         Stephen Dorrell, Chair of the Health Select Committee, 16
November.

 

Dame Julie is also scheduled to appear before PASC on 16 December 2013 to
give evidence as part of their inquiry into the work of Parliament’s
Ombudsman service.

 

I hope this information is helpful. Once again I am sorry that this
information was not provided with our original response.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Luke Whiting

Head of FOI/DPA

Freedom of Information and Data Protection Team

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

E: [1][email address]

W: [2]www.ombudsman.org.uk

 

Follow us on

[3]fb  [4]twitter  [5]linkedin

 

show quoted sections

All email communications with PHSO pass through the Government Secure
Intranet, and may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for
legal purposes.
The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to achieve
the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007), the UK
Government quality mark initiative for information security products and
services. For more information about this please visit www.cctmark.gov.uk

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/
http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/
3. http://www.facebook.com/phsombudsman
4. http://www.twitter.com/PHSOmbudsman
5. http://www.linkedin.com/company/parliame...

[Name Removed] (Account suspended)

Dear foiofficer,

1. I cannot open the three attachments.

2. Thank you for your apology and I am grateful for this information but I really wish that my requests were read, absorbed and acted upon before dashing off replies with half ( if lucky) the information requested.

This is public money that the PHSO is continually wasting when it continues to act in a high-handed and secretive manner in the provision of reasonable information.

....Only to have the requester continually have to take the matter to appeal. It, does, as you recognise, waste everyone's time and valuable taxpayer resources. Even though the PHSO has a vast budget of 32m to fritter away, seemingly unsupervised, it is ridiculous to do so in this manner.

Clearly, by the standard of replies, the PHSO must have problems in recruiting sufficiently able employees willing to apply themselves to answering requests ( yourself excepted).

- One employee seemingly doesn't know what a manager is ....and thinks the entire workforce is managerial.

But wouldn't it just be easier - and cheaper - to employ people who can apply themselves to answering FoI and DPA requests instead of being public relations wannabe's?

Yours sincerely,

[Name Removed]

foiofficer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service
Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your
correspondence.

show quoted sections

All email communications with PHSO pass through the Government Secure
Intranet, and may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for
legal purposes.
The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to achieve
the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007), the UK
Government quality mark initiative for information security products and
services. For more information about this please visit www.cctmark.gov.uk

D. Speers left an annotation ()

Thank you for your information Jt Oakley, I appreciate your time.

CA Purkis left an annotation ()

This is my best FOI to date. Why do you think they back tracked and provided you with the information in the end? I will be requesting the minutes of the meetings between the Dame and the various people she is scheduled to meet. Keith Vaz especially.

[Name Removed] (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Because there is no reason why the public should not be informed how their money is being spent.

Unfortunately some employees seem to think that they are working for a private company - that needs defending.

The PHSO certainly does need defending ....but this contempt-for- the-public attitude towards reasonable enquiries is just so out of step with the current 'candour, openness transparency' dictum and demonstrates the PHSO's arrogant attitude in public wonderfully

Maybe someone in authority has just realised it.

Other than that....maybe HRH the a Queen objected that Dame Julie's movements were considered more secret than hers.

Della left an annotation ()

I will be interested to see those meeting minutes. Make sure you put them in the public domain.

CA Purkis left an annotation ()

I certainly will

[Name Removed] (Account suspended)

Dear foiofficer,

So who is Man of Mystery Dan Rouffley, 10 October?

And what were/are the purposes of these meetings?

Yours sincerely,

[Name Removed]

foiofficer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service
Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your
correspondence.

show quoted sections

All email communications with PHSO pass through the Government Secure
Intranet, and may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for
legal purposes.
The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to achieve
the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007), the UK
Government quality mark initiative for information security products and
services. For more information about this please visit www.cctmark.gov.uk

Boris Smith left an annotation ()

Hi,

Someone on here might want to ask for a full copy of the recent staff survey which shows how much staff think that senior management are making a total mess of everything.

Boris

D. Speers left an annotation ()

Thank you Boris Smith...am onto it!

[Name Removed] (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Thanks Boris...

I bet we won't get it.

The senior staff will be in the basement...

.. stoking the furnaces with it now.

D. Speers left an annotation ()

We'll see!!
Dee

D. Speers left an annotation ()

Thank you Jt Oakley for all your hard work!

Della left an annotation ()

How does Boris know about the staff survey?

CA Purkis left an annotation ()

Thank you Boris . Can you link us to your request Dee. Perhaps Boris is the person we have been waiting for Della?

D. Speers left an annotation ()

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/s...
Request sent Oct 10th 2013

Brenda Prentice left an annotation ()

I’m just about to take a case to the small claims court.

A panel nurse gave the wrong advice and PHOS said they would not investigate. I knew it was wrong and spent many hours researching the right advice. After I presented it the nurse ‘changed’ her report.

I am not to know if she was disciplined so I am now going to ask for my costs for the research in the small claims court.

PHOS tell me to take advice as they will defend ‘vigorously’. I did ask what the answer was when I’m assessed as a moderate risk to reputation, but I’m told after this was recorded there was no other comment!

[Name Removed] (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Read this.....

Pre Action Disclosure.. You may be able to get to read all the files, which would enable you to present a fair case in court.

http://www.justanswer.com/uk-law/6s9ty-n...

foiofficer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Dear [Name Removed],

 

Thank you for your email of 10 October 2013 in which you asked:

 

‘Who is Man of Mystery Dan Rouffley, 10 October?

 

And what were/are the purposes of these meetings?’

 

David Ruffley is MP for the constituency of [1]Bury St
Edmunds in [2]Suffolk.  

 

As I have previously explained, Dame Julie will meet with MPs on
individual complaints that concern their constituents as and when the need
arises.

 

The purpose of her meetings with the Chairs of select committees is to
share themes arising in our casework about specific issues and/or
organisations and to discuss, more generally, how the Ombudsman’s service
can support them in their function and help improve public services.

 

I have provided you with the recorded information we hold about this and I
hope this further explanation is helpful.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Luke Whiting

Head of FOI/DP

 

show quoted sections

All email communications with PHSO pass through the Government Secure
Intranet, and may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for
legal purposes.
The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to achieve
the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007), the UK
Government quality mark initiative for information security products and
services. For more information about this please visit www.cctmark.gov.uk

References

Visible links
1. Bury St Edmunds (UK Parliament constituency)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bury_St_Edm...
2. Suffolk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffolk

[Name Removed] (Account suspended)

Dear foiofficer,

Thanks.. that explains it,

Yours sincerely,

[Name Removed]

foiofficer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service
Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your
correspondence.

show quoted sections

All email communications with PHSO pass through the Government Secure
Intranet, and may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for
legal purposes.
The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to achieve
the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007), the UK
Government quality mark initiative for information security products and
services. For more information about this please visit www.cctmark.gov.uk

[Name Removed] (Account suspended)

Dear foiofficer,

I'm afraid that I still cannot download the images
above on October 7.

Yours sincerely,

[Name Removed]

foiofficer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service
Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your
correspondence.

show quoted sections

All email communications with PHSO pass through the Government Secure
Intranet, and may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for
legal purposes.
The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to achieve
the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007), the UK
Government quality mark initiative for information security products and
services. For more information about this please visit www.cctmark.gov.uk

[Name Removed] (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

If you've read this, you may wish to know that the documents I was requesting..and were withheld at first..were the very ones that proved my case.

They were handwritten documents that the PHSO seemingly had no idea were covered by the FoI and DPA.

There were 'holes' in the information sent..that's why I chased it.

Deliberate or incompetent? You decide.

But this seems to be a consistent pattern with the PHSO. Requesters should remind the PHSO that withholding documents is illegal.

In addition, even if you manage to get the documents upholding your case, you cannot hold the officer to account. Any investigation is processed by a subordinate officer to the person who didn't bother to read your case .....and signed it off on a completely false premise.

You cannot object about this.

So corrupt or arrogant?

You decide.

[Name Removed] (Account suspended)

Dear Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman's handling of my FOI request 'Documents missing, Risk categories and Dame Julie's media diary'.

Still can't download the accompanying documents

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

Yours faithfully,

[Name Removed]

foiofficer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service
Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your
correspondence.

show quoted sections

All email communications with PHSO pass through the Government Secure
Intranet, and may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for
legal purposes.
The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to achieve
the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007), the UK
Government quality mark initiative for information security products and
services. For more information about this please visit www.cctmark.gov.uk

foiofficer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Dear [Name Removed]

Your information request (FDN-175376)

I have reviewed the history of your request in this thread. The attachments you refer to are not information which we released in response to your request. The attachments are generated when we reply via www.whatdotheyknow.com and do not remove our Office signature. The attachments are jpeg images of the Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn icon.

The responses to your information request are contained in our written replies. We have not withheld any information or applied any exemptions to your requests in this thread.

On this basis, please let us know if you still wish to proceed with an internal review.

Yours sincerely

Claire Helm
Freedom of Information/Data Protection Officer
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
E: [email address]
W: www.ombudsman.org.uk

show quoted sections

All email communications with PHSO pass through the Government Secure Intranet, and may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.
The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to achieve the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007), the UK Government quality mark initiative for information security products and services. For more information about this please visit www.cctmark.gov.uk

[Name Removed] (Account suspended)

Dear foiofficer,

The JPG 's are within Mr Whitings letter..october 7.

i still cannot see them.

Yours sincerely,

[Name Removed]

foiofficer, Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

Thank you for your e-mail to the Parliamentary and Health Service
Ombudsman. This return e-mail shows that we have received your
correspondence.

show quoted sections

All email communications with PHSO pass through the Government Secure
Intranet, and may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for
legal purposes.
The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to achieve
the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number 2006/04/0007), the UK
Government quality mark initiative for information security products and
services. For more information about this please visit www.cctmark.gov.uk