Freedom of Information Request: Child Pornography Searches and Convictions

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

AdrianPaulBryanVince

Monday 10th April 2017

Dear Sirs

Freedom of Information Request

Please can you kindly provide myself with the following Information:

1. Between either 2011 and 2015, how many Search Warrants have been carried out in regard to allegations or tip-offs in regard to possession of online Child Pornography?

2. Of these Searches, how many found clear evidence of possession of online Child Pornography?

3. Of these, how many contained more than a handful, or significant numbers of, Category A and/or Category B images and/or videos?

4. Of those Convicted, how many were given a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (S.H.P.O. Or the earlier titled S.O.P.O.)?

5. Of those Convicted, how many had previously been Convicted of Sexual Contact Crime(s) against Children?

6. Of those Convicted, how many were later Convicted of Sexual Contact Crime(s) against Children?

If there is a Charge for this Information, please kindly let me know.

Thanking you in advance of your response.

Regards

Yours Sincerely

Adrian Paul Bryan-Vince

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Bryan-Vince

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2017040000546

I write in connection with your request for information which was received
by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 16/04/2017.  I note you seek
access to the following information:

"1. Between either 2011 and 2015, how many Search Warrants have been
carried out in regard to allegations or tip-offs in regard to possession
of online Child Pornography?

2. Of these Searches, how many found clear evidence of possession of
online Child Pornography?

3. Of these, how many contained more than a handful, or significant
numbers of, Category A and/or Category B images and/or videos?

4. Of those Convicted, how many were given a Sexual Harm Prevention Order
(S.H.P.O. Or the earlier titled S.O.P.O.)?

5. Of those Convicted, how many had previously been Convicted of Sexual
Contact Crime(s) against Children?

6. Of those Convicted, how many were later Convicted of Sexual Contact
Crime(s) against Children?"

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.  

If you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please contact
us at [email address] or on the phone at 0207 161 3500, quoting the
reference number above. Should your enquiry relate to the logging or
allocations process we will be able to assist you directly and where your
enquiry relates to other matters (such as the status of the request) we
will be able to pass on a message and/or advise you of the relevant
contact details.

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, write to or
phone:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 0303 123 1113

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

AdrianPaulBryanVince

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

The word "either" should not be in my first sentence.

Apologies for the typo.

Yours faithfully,

AdrianPaulBryanVince

AdrianPaulBryanVince

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

Apologises for the lack of clarity in respect of one part of my FOI request.

I hereby clarify my FOI request as follows:

By "Sexual Contact Crimes" against Children, I mean Crimes such as Rape, Indecent Assault, Molestation of a Child or Children under 16, or Grooming of a Child or Children under 16 with evidenced or clear intent to commit Sexual Offences;

Furthermore, by "more than a handful" of Cat A or Cat B images, I mean at least 1% of the overall number of images, except where that 1% of images would be over 25 images (to wit, the total number of images was over 2,500);

The number of images for those under 1% and those over 1% would be very much appreciated, together with the percentage and associated numerical statistics for those with a moderate to very large total of overall images (to wit over 1,000 to potentially millions images.)

The more data the better, but I am conscious you have time limits and there would be a potential charge for a lot of information and research.

Of course, given sufficient statistics, I could work out the percentages for myself, but I will leave yourselves to decide whether or not you are willing to table all of the relevant numbers and percentages (I would suggest that an Excel table would work these out automatically).

Thanking you in advance.

Yours sincerely,

Adrian Paul Bryan-Vince

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Paul Bryan-Vince

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2017040000546

I write in connection with your request for information which was received
by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 16/04/2017.  I note you seek
access to the following information:
1. Between 2011 and 2015, how many Search Warrants have been carried out
in regard to allegations or tip-offs in regard to possession of online
Child Pornography? 2. Of these Searches, how many found clear evidence of
possession of online Child Pornography?
3. Of these, how many contained more than a handful, or significant
numbers of, Category A and/or Category B images and/or videos? 4. Of those
Convicted, how many were given a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (S.H.P.O. Or
the earlier titled S.O.P.O.)? 5. Of those Convicted, how many had
previously been Convicted of Sexual Contact Crime(s) against Children? 6.
Of those Convicted, how many were later Convicted of Sexual Contact
Crime(s) against Children? Clarified on 20/04/2017:

Apologises for the lack of clarity in respect of one part of my FOI
request. I hereby clarify my FOI request as follows: By "Sexual Contact
Crimes" against Children, I mean Crimes such as Rape, Indecent Assault,
Molestation of a Child or Children under 16, or Grooming of a Child or
Children under 16 with evidenced or clear intent to commit Sexual
Offences; Furthermore, by "more than a handful" of Cat A or Cat B images,
I mean at least 1% of the overall number of images, except where that 1%
of images would be over 25 images (to wit, the total number of images was
over 2,500); The number of images for those under 1% and those over 1%
would be very much appreciated, together with the percentage and
associated numerical statistics for those with a moderate to very large
total of overall images (to wit over 1,000 to potentially millions
images.) The more data the better, but I am conscious you have time limits
and there would be a potential charge for a lot of information and
research. Of course, given sufficient statistics, I could work out the
percentages for myself, but I will leave yourselves to decide whether or
not you are willing to table all of the relevant numbers and percentages
(I would suggest that an Excel table would work these out automatically).
Thanking you in advance. .

SEARCHES TO LOCATE INFORMATION

To locate the information relevant to your request searches were conducted
within the MPS.  The searches located information relevant to your
request.

DECISION

This E mail is to inform you that it will not be possible to respond to
your request within the cost threshold.  This response serves as a Refusal
Notice under Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act).
 Please see the legal annex for further information on the exemptions
applied in respect of your request.

REASONS FOR DECISION

You have asked for the number of search warrants that have been carried
out in regards to allegations or tip offs in respect of possession of
online pornography. There is no easy means of retrieval of the information
you have requested. There is not an automatic means of retrieving the
information.

There are multiple channels that 'allegations or tip offs' could be
received into the MPS.  All of these would need to be assessed to see if
they fall into the scope of your request.  Any data results are likely to
be inaccurate as they would be reliant on MPS operational teams uploading
the information onto the MPS criminal intelligence database, CRIMINT. The
results from intelligence searches would, at best only be a partial
picture. For these results to be developed into an accurate and reliable
dataset, extensive searching would have to be made across other arrest and
prosecution systems.  This task would take far in excess of the
appropriate time limit for Freedom of Information act requests. Please
note that the MPS does not routinely collate conviction data.

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.

Section 16 - Advice and Assistance:

I would like to provide you with advice as to how you may narrow your
request so that it does not exceed the appropriate limit, however due to
the rationale stated above, I can see no practical means of redefining
your request..

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please E
mail at [email address], quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

Yvette Taylor
Information Manager

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)&(2) of the Act provides:

(1) Section 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.

(2) 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.

Section 16 of the Act provides:

(1) It shall be the duty of a public authority to provide advice and
assistance, so far as it would be reasonable to expect the authority to do
so, to persons who propose to make, or have made, requests for information
to it.

(2) Any public authority which, in relation to the provision of advice or
assistance in any case, conforms with the code of practice under section
45 is to be taken to comply with the duty imposed by subsection (1) in
relation to that case.
 
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, write to or
phone:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone:  0303 123 1113

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

AdrianPaulBryanVince

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

Thank you for your prompt reply.

i realise that I am asking for quite a lot of Data and Information.

I can simplify my FOI requests in a number of ways, if it helps.

I am also willing to pay the half to all of the difference over and above the £450 limit, if necessary.

Yours faithfully,

AdrianPaulBryanVince

AdrianPaulBryanVince

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

Freedom of Information Request ( Reduced and Partially Revised )

Please can you kindly provide myself with the following Data:

1. During the period of 2011 and 2015 inclusive, how many Search Warrants have been carried out in regard to Possession of Online Child Pornography or Online Child Exploitation?

2. Of these Searches, how many found clear evidence of Possession of Online Child Pornography?

3. Of these, how many contained more than 2% Category A and/or Category B images and/or videos?

4. Of those Convicted, how many were given a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (S.H.P.O./S.O.P.O.)?

5. Of those Convicted, how many had previously been Convicted of Sexual Crime(s) against a Child or Children Under 16 (Rape, Indecent Assault or Grooming)?

6. Of those Convicted of Possession of Online Child Pornography, how many were later Convicted of Sexual Crime(s) against a Child or Children Under 16 (Rape, Indecent Assault or Grooming)?

If possible, could you please also create a table the relevant numbers and percentages. I suggest an Excel table would work these out automatically.

The more data the better, but I am conscious you have time limits and there would be a potential charge for a lot of information and research. If there is likely to be a Partial Charge for this Information, to wit, any sum over £450, please kindly let me know.

Thanking you in advance of your provision of the required Data.

Regards

Yours Sincerely

Adrian Paul Bryan-Vince

AdrianPaulBryanVince

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

As a special exception, I am offering to Reduce the Data Period to 2014/2015, which should reduce the Research by around 40%; I have also simplifed some of my bulleted Requests, so overall I believe I have reduced my FOI Request by between 50% - 60%.

I have also offered to make a partial contribution to the supplying of Data beyond a certain amount. However, I am on Disability Benefits, so that would not be easy to come by. I also note that the sum of £450 is simply a Guideline Figure and there can be exceptions made to this.

Furthermore, I would point out that the Data gained by this Study would be hugely beneficial to various Agencies, including the Police, Social Services, Probation and Safeguarding Charities, etc.

Yours faithfully,

AdrianPaulBryanVince

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Paul Bryan-Vince

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2017050000023

I write in connection with your request for information which was received
by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 28/04/2017.  I note you seek
access to the following information:

* 1. During the period of 2011 and 2015 inclusive, how many Search
Warrants have been carried out in regard to Possession of Online Child
Pornography or Online Child Exploitation? 2. Of these Searches, how
many found clear evidence of Possession of Online Child Pornography?
3. Of these, how many contained more than 2% Category A and/or
Category B images and/or videos? 4. Of those Convicted, how many were
given a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (S.H.P.O./S.O.P.O.)? 5. Of those
Convicted, how many had previously been Convicted of Sexual  Crime(s)
against a Child or Children Under 16 (Rape, Indecent Assault or
Grooming)? 6. Of those Convicted of Possession of Online Child
Pornography, how many were later Convicted of Sexual Crime(s) against
a Child or Children Under 16 (Rape, Indecent Assault or Grooming)?

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.  

If you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please contact
us at [email address] or on the phone at 0207 161 3500, quoting the
reference number above. Should your enquiry relate to the logging or
allocations process we will be able to assist you directly and where your
enquiry relates to other matters (such as the status of the request) we
will be able to pass on a message and/or advise you of the relevant
contact details.

Yours sincerely

Peter Deja
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, write to or
phone:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone: 0303 123 1113

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

AdrianPaulBryanVince

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

Just to correct my earlier statement...

"I am offering to Reduce the Data Period to 2014/2015, which should reduce the Research by around 40%; I have also simplifed some of my bulleted Requests, so overall I believe I have reduced my FOI Request by between 50% - 60%."

The fact is that it would "Reduce the Research by around 60%" and "Reduce my overall FOI Request by between 70-80%."

Yours faithfully,

AdrianPaulBryanVince

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Bryan-Vince

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2017050000023

I respond in connection with your request for information which was
received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 28/04/2017.  I note
you seek access to the following information:

1. During the period of 2011 and  2015 inclusive, how many Search Warrants
have been carried out in regard to Possession of Online Child Pornography
or Online Child Exploitation?
2. Of these Searches, how many found clear evidence of Possession of
Online Child Pornography?
3. Of these, how many contained more than 2% Category A and/or Category B
images and/or videos?
4. Of those Convicted, how many were given a Sexual Harm Prevention Order
(S.H.P.O./S.O.P.O.)?
5. Of those Convicted, how many had previously been Convicted of Sexual
 Crime(s) against a Child or Children Under 16 (Rape, Indecent Assault or
Grooming)?
6. Of those Convicted of Possession of Online Child Pornography, how many
were later Convicted of Sexual Crime(s) against a Child or Children Under
16 (Rape, Indecent Assault or Grooming)? Clarified on 03/05/2017:

Just to correct my earlier statement... "I am offering to Reduce the Data
Period to 2014/2015, which should reduce the Research by around 40%; I
have also simplifed some of my bulleted Requests, so overall I believe I
have reduced my FOI Request by between 50% - 60%." The fact is that it
would "Reduce the Research by around 60%" and "Reduce my overall FOI
Request by between 70-80%." .

SEARCHES TO LOCATE INFORMATION

To locate the information relevant to your request searches were conducted
within the MPS.  The searches located information relevant to your
request.

DECISION

This E-mail is to inform you that it will not be possible to respond to
your request within the cost threshold.  This response serves as a Refusal
Notice under Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act).
 Please see the legal annex for further information on the exemptions
applied in respect of your request.

REASONS FOR DECISION

This request is a follow on from your request 2017040000546 which was
refused on the grounds that it exceeded the cost threshold allowed for
Freedom of Information Act requests. We advised you that we could not
offer you a means of redefining your request due to the rationale stated
in our previous response to you. We advised the following:

'There is no easy means of retrieval of the information you have
requested. There is not an automatic means of retrieving the information.
 There are multiple channels that 'allegations or tip offs' could be
received into the MPS.  All of these would need to be assessed to see if
they fall into the scope of your request.  Any data results are likely to
be inaccurate as they would be reliant on MPS operational teams uploading
the information onto the MPS criminal intelligence database, CRIMINT. The
results from intelligence searches would, at best only be a partial
picture. For these results to be developed into an accurate and reliable
dataset, extensive searching would have to be made across other arrest and
prosecution systems.  This task would take far in excess of the
appropriate time limit for Freedom of Information act requests. Please
note that the MPS does not routinely collate conviction data.'

You have narrowed the time frame of your request, however you request
would still far exceed the cost threshold.Even with a financial
contribution the task is far too complex to be completed within the time
and financial constraints set out under FOIA. Additionally, it would not
be viable for the MPS to provide you with an accurate answer as indicated
above.

To obtain the information requested for this FOIA request, and for the
dates requested, would require examination of multiple systems, and would
take considerably longer than 2 days.

Additionally, due to the volume of work that would be required, this would
be extremely burdensome on the MPS as staff would have to diverted away
 from other policing functions  to undertake this onerous task.
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.

I would like to provide you with advice as to how you may narrow your
request so that it does not exceed the appropriate limit, however as
previously stated we are unable to suggest any practical way for you to do
so

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please email
at [email address], quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

Yvette Taylor
Information Manager

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)&(2) of the Act provides:

(1) Section 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.

(2) 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.

Section 16 of the Act provides:

(1) It shall be the duty of a public authority to provide advice and
assistance, so far as it would be reasonable to expect the authority to do
so, to persons who propose to make, or have made, requests for information
to it.

(2) Any public authority which, in relation to the provision of advice or
assistance in any case, conforms with the code of practice under section
45 is to be taken to comply with the duty imposed by subsection (1) in
relation to that case.
 
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, write to or
phone:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone:  0303 123 1113

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

AdrianPaulBryanVince

Dear Yvette/Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

Thank you for your further reply.

Your e-mail address is hidden on this website. Can you please e-mail at adrianpaulbryanvince at yahoo dot com to provide me with your e-mail address.

Thank you

Yours faithfully,

AdrianPaulBryanVince