Further information on Claim Number AOOHS284

CA Purkis made this Freedom of Information request to Government Legal Department

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

Response to this request is long overdue. By law, under all circumstances, Government Legal Department should have responded by now (details). You can complain by requesting an internal review.

Dear Government Legal Department,

As of September 2015, you had charged the Home Office and the taxpayer £8978.30 defending a request of mine for my own personal data. You claimed your client had provided me with all my data.
It has now transpired that your client DID NOT provide me with all my personal data, and has conspired to keep my personal data from me in an attempt to cover up a gross breach of the Data Protection Act by one of its employees. It seems there were quite a few people involved in keeping this matter covered up.
Please could you therefore provide me with the following information;

1. What is the current amount you have on record to charge the Home office and the British taxpayer for Case number A00HS284?
2. Please could you provide me with the number of emails, telephone calls or correspondence Mr Johnathan Jones, current Treasury Solicitor, but previously Director General, Home Office Legal Adviser’s Branch, or his office, has exchanged with Mr Rob Whiteman, previously CEO of the UK Border Agency, regarding the claim AOOHS284 or anything related to this claim?
3. Please could you provide me with confirmation that Mr Jonathan Jones has given any written or verbal instructions related to the claim number AOOHS284 in his role as Treasury Solicitor.
Please note that I am NOT asking for any information that would constitute legal privilege, but rather confirmation of recorded information you hold.

Yours faithfully,

CA Purkis

Jt Oakley left an annotation ()

Tut tut.

Not looking good for the legal department.

FOI, Government Legal Department

Our Ref: RM 20 16

Dear Ms Purkis,

I acknowledge receipt of your email dated 8 March 2016. I will respond to your correspondence shortly.

Yours sincerely,

Paul Woods
DRO, FOI/DPA Co-ordinator, Head of Library Services
Operations, Government Legal Department

One Kemble Street, London WC2B 4TS
Telephone: +44 (0)20 7210 3045
[email address]

show quoted sections

FOI, Government Legal Department

1 Attachment

Dear Ms Purkis

Please find attached the response to your Freedom of Information Act request

Yours sincerely,

Paul Woods
DRO, FOI/DPA Co-ordinator, Head of Library Services
Operations, Government Legal Department

One Kemble Street, London WC2B 4TS
Telephone: +44 (0)20 7210 3045
[email address]

show quoted sections

Dear FOI,

Dear Mr Woods

Many thanks for your reply.

Please could you provide me with the current charge for claim number A00HS284 with the VAT charges included? If 20% VAT were to be added to the amount you stated, it would increase the amount by a mighty £2000, so I would be grateful if you could give me an accurate final amount at this time?

You state that you have no recorded information on Mr Jones having given any written or verbal instructions related to claim number A00HS284. This seems unlikely in view of the fact that he wrote to me on the 16th March 2015, with very clear instructions about the case . So there is already one instance. In order to get information on this claim, he would have had to communicate with his staff?
In light of this, I would be grateful if you could re look at any correspondence that Mr Jones partook in relating to this claim. Please note - I did not specify 'legal' instructions - merely instructions. That would include any emails etc sent to his staff (or anyone else - for example The Home Office) regarding this claim.
Perhaps it would be easier if I used the word 'information' rather than 'instructions'.
So - Please could you provide me with confirmation that Mr Jonathan Jones has given or exchanged any written or recorded information related to claim number AOOHS284 with his staff or anybody else?

I look forward to your reply.

Yours sincerely,

CA Purkis

Dear Mr Woods

Please note that I no longer require this information. It has been provided to me through another source.

The GLD spent £18,449.15 of tax payers money, over a two year period, defending a Subject Access Request claim under the Data Protection Act.
I maintained that the Home Office had not provided me with all my requested data and they steadfastly maintained they had.
They vigorously and aggressively litigated and ignored all attempts at resolution.
A day before the trial they provided me with my outstanding data and provided me with a reason they had not given it to me.
They were 'unaware of why it was not disclosed in response to the SAR'
Yes - £18,449.15 of unawareness.
Yours sincerely,

CA Purkis

Jt Oakley left an annotation ()

Well done CA...and how typical of a public authority to pretend it's lost it's files.

Absolute disgrace in spending taxes to defend the indefensible.

phsothefacts Pressure Group left an annotation ()

Well done C.A. Why do they always take it to the wire? There should be a heavy penalty to pay for any organisation which plays brinkmanship with the legal process.

CA Purkis left an annotation ()

It's a total farce. What's more of a farce is the UK taxpayer paying millions each year for organisations not fit for purpose, like the PHSO!

Jt Oakley left an annotation ()

These negligent organisations just stack up the external costs to the taxpayer...because they can.

Defending their own blunders ...and covering them up.

The Vanity Vexing that the PHSO my FOIA request cost around £10k -( court upheld my case) ICO caseworker time .. and that doesn't include expense of the in-house lawyers, and the original organisational staff - involved with trying to deflect and cover up the case.

Private organisations record everything - office Space, heating, lighting, HR costs. Because that's the real financial burden.

So evey time a witholding organisation acts in this defensive way, it costs the public purse even more than the headline amount.

CA Purkis left an annotation ()

Seems the government forgot to set up a committee or another organisation to complain to about this?

Jt Oakley left an annotation ()

Most remiss,

What the world needs now is more ineffective quangos.