Notification to Second Sight that basement of Fujitsu was a test environment

Post Office Limited did not have the information requested.

Dear Post Office Limited,

Angela van den Bogerd advised Second Sight that the basement room at Fujitsu Headquarters in Bracknell, that Michael Rudkin visited on 19 August 2008, was a test environment and was not connected to the live system.

Please provide copies of any communications between Fujitsu and Post Office that either confirm or deny this statement.

Please provide your response in electronic form.

Yours faithfully,

Peter C. Bell

information.rights@postoffice.co.uk, Post Office Limited

Our ref: FOI2024/00024

Dear Peter C. Bell,

Thank you for your request for information which was received on 5th
January. Your request is being considered under the terms of the Freedom
of Information Act 2000.

The Act requires that a response must be given promptly, and in any event
within 20 working days. We will therefore reply at the latest by 2nd
February.

Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.

Regards,

Data Protection and Information Rights Team

100 Wood Street,

London,

EC 2V 7ER

information.rights@postoffice.co.uk, Post Office Limited

1 Attachment

Dear Peter C. Bell,

Please find the response attached relating to your Freedom of Information
request.

Regards,

Data Protection and Information Rights Team

100 Wood Street,

London,

EC2V 7ER

Dear [email address],

I am sorry but perhaps if I reorder my question, it might help you to perform a search more likely to return relevant results?

a) there is alleged to be a room at the Bracknell Headquarters in Bracknell. This room is located in the basement of the building.

b) Michael Rudkin visited this room on 19 August 2008.

c) Angela van den Bogerd advised Second Sight that this room was a test environment and was not connected to the live system.

d) Please provide copies of any communications between Fujitsu and Post Office that either confirm or deny this statement (of Angela van den Bogerd).

Hopefullly, by splitting up my earlier question and reordering it in this way (using the exact same words), you will be able to identify some search keywords that might answer the question I posed.

Yours sincerely,

Peter C. Bell

information.rights@postoffice.co.uk, Post Office Limited

Our ref: FOI2024/00331

Dear Peter C. Bell,

Thank you for your request for information which was received on 20th
February. Your request is being considered under the terms of the Freedom
of Information Act 2000.

The Act requires that a response must be given promptly, and in any event
within 20 working days. We will therefore reply at the latest by 20th
March.

Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.

Regards,

Data Protection and Information Rights Team

100 Wood Street,

London,

EC2V 7ER

Dear [email address],

My apologies a) should read

a) there is alleged to be a room at the Fujitsu Headquarters in Bracknell. This room is located in the basement of the building.

Yours sincerely,

Peter C. Bell

information.rights@postoffice.co.uk, Post Office Limited

1 Attachment

Dear Peter C. Bell,

We do apologise for the delay in responding to your request.

Please find the response attached relating to your Freedom of Information
request.

Regards,

Data Protection and Information Rights Team

100 Wood Street,

London,

EC2V 7ER

Dear Post Office Limited,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Post Office Limited's handling of my FOI request 'Notification to Second Sight that basement of Fujitsu was a test environment'.

In your response you state that you have identified OVER 834 hits during the period 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2014. You have also stated that a conservative estimate for reviewing each hit is 2 minutes per entry.

a) please provide the actual number of matches - not a statement OVER x - but the actual number you have identified
b) please provide some justification for the "conservative" estimate of 2 minutes per entry to determine whether it might be responsive to the enquiry . How have you arrived at this figure?
c) why did you chose the time period that you have chosen? Given that the visit by Michael Rudkin took place on 19 August 2008 why have you chosen the arbitrary dates that exclude the period immediately prior to his visit and immediately following his visit?

You ask me if I could narrow the time period. Could I suggest that 1 March 2008 to 31 December 2011 could be used initially.

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

Yours faithfully,

Peter C. Bell

information.rights@postoffice.co.uk, Post Office Limited

Our ref: FOI2024/00678

Dear Peter C. Bell,

Thank you for your request for information which was received on 22nd
April. Your request is being considered under the terms of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.

The Act requires that a response must be given promptly, and in any event
within 20 working days. We will therefore reply at the latest by 21st May.

Please note that although we are treating your correspondence as a new
request, we appreciate that you have asked further questions relating to
the handling of the original request which we will review and cover in our
response.

Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.

Regards,

Data Protection and Information Rights Team

100 Wood Street,

London,

EC2V 7ER

information.rights@postoffice.co.uk, Post Office Limited

1 Attachment

Dear Peter C. Bell,

Please find the response attached relating to your Freedom of Information
request.

Regards,

Data Protection and Information Rights Team

100 Wood Street,

London,

EC2V 7ER