Policy and procedures about the title or subject of Freedom of Information Requests

The request was successful.

Dear Information Commissioner’s Office,

In decision notice FS50559082 you determined in Paragraph 18 that the title of Freedom of Information requests made via WhatDoTheyKnow does not form part of the request: "However, the Commissioner’s view is that the title is immaterial, as this is not part of the request." The title of requests made via WhatDoTheyKnow forms the subject field of the email sent to the public authority containing the freedom of information request.

Please provide all ICO policies and guidance on the inclusion or exclusion of text in the Subject field in a public authority's consideration of Freedom of Information requests submitted by email.

Please ensure you provide Lines To Take, Casework Advice Notes, reference to statutory Codes of Practice, non-statutory guidance produced by the ICO or by the MOJ or other bodies, and any other decision notices or tribunal decisions that clarify the status of the Subject line of emails containing freedom of information requests.

Where this information is already in the public domain and you thus intend relying on the relevant exemption, please provide appropriate advice and assistance in compliance with S16 as to where I may find the guidance, preferably by a web link. I ask this as you will have substantially more knowledge than me as to where best to find resources in this area.

Thank you

Yours faithfully,

Doug Paulley

AccessICOinformation, Information Commissioner's Office

Thank you for contacting the Information Commissioner’s Office. We confirm
that we have received your correspondence.

 

If you have made a request for information held by the ICO we will contact
you as soon as possible if we need any further information to enable us to
answer your request. If we don't need any further information we will
respond to you within our published, and statutory, service levels. For
more information please visit [1]http://ico.org.uk/about_us/how_we_comply

 

If you have raised a new information rights concern - we aim to send you
an initial response and case reference number within 30 days.

 

If you are concerned about the way an organisation is handling your
personal information, we will not usually look into it unless you have
raised it with the organisation first. For more information please see our
webpage ‘raising a concern with an organisation’ (go to our homepage and
follow the link ‘for the public’). You can also call the number below.

 

If you have requested advice - we aim to respond within 14 days.

 

If your correspondence relates to an existing case - we will add it to
your case and consider it on allocation to a case officer.

 

Copied correspondence - we do not respond to correspondence that has been
copied to us.

 

For more information about our services, please see our webpage ‘Service
standards and what to expect' (go to our homepage and follow the links for
‘Report a concern’ and ‘Service standards and what to expect'). You can
also call the number below.

 

If there is anything you would like to discuss with us, please call our
helpline on 0303 123 1113.

 

Yours sincerely

 

The Information Commissioner’s Office

 

Our newsletter

Details of how to sign up for our monthly e-newsletter can be found at
[2]http://www.ico.org.uk/tools_and_resource...

 

Twitter

Find us on Twitter at [3]http://www.twitter.com/ICOnews

 

show quoted sections

Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow,
Cheshire, SK9 5AF
Tel: 0303 123 1113 Fax: 01625 524 510 Web: www.ico.org.uk

References

Visible links
1. http://ico.org.uk/about_us/how_we_comply
2. http://www.ico.org.uk/tools_and_resource...
3. http://www.twitter.com/ICOnews

Information Commissioner's Office

16 December 2015

 

Case Reference Number IRQ0607941

 

Dear Mr Paulley

Request for Information
 
Thank you for your information request to the Information Commissioner’s
Office (ICO) of 2 December 2015, in which you asked for the following:
 
“In decision notice FS50559082 you determined in Paragraph 18 that
the title of Freedom of Information requests made via WhatDoTheyKnow does
not form part of the request: "However, the Commissioner’s view is that
the title is immaterial, as this is not part of the request." The title of
requests made via WhatDoTheyKnow forms the subject field of the email sent
to the public authority containing the freedom of information request.

Please provide all ICO policies and guidance on the inclusion or exclusion
of text in the Subject field in a public authority's consideration of
Freedom of Information requests submitted by email.

Please ensure you provide Lines To Take, Casework Advice Notes, reference
to statutory Codes of Practice, non-statutory guidance produced by the ICO
or by the MOJ or other bodies, and any other decision notices or tribunal
decisions that clarify the status of the Subject line of emails containing
freedom of information requests.

Where this information is already in the public domain and you thus intend
relying on the relevant exemption, please provide appropriate advice and
assistance in compliance with S16 as to where I may find the guidance,
preferably by a web link. I ask this as you will have substantially more
knowledge than me as to where best to find resources in this area.”
 
We have dealt with your request in accordance with your ‘right to know’
under section 1(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA), which
entitles you to be provided with any information ‘held’ by a public
authority, unless an appropriate exemption applies.
 
You may be aware we have responded quite recently to an information
request via ‘WhatDoTheyKnow? which raised this same issue, and therefore
you may find this response helpful.  It can be accessed via WDTK here:
 
[1]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/w...
 
 
 
To answer your own request, we can confirm that the ICO does not hold, and
never has held, any recorded information, whether in the form of a Line To
Take, Casework Advice Note, statutory Code of Practice or non-statutory
guidance, policy or procedure etc, which suggests to any public authority
(including the ICO) that any information given by a requester in the
subject line of an email containing a freedom of information request
should, or should not, be included as being within the scope of the
request. 
 
Similarly, we are not aware of the Ministry of Justice, or any other body,
having produced or published any similar policy or guidance on this issue.
 
Our published advice for individuals does not make any reference to
whether information included within the subject line of an email is
considered to be within the scope of a request or not.  Our guidance for
public authorities on [2]Interpreting and clarifying requests talks about
taking account of the context and background of requests in order to
understand what the requester wants. If the requester has included
information within the subject line of their emailed request this may well
help to clarify the meaning, and if so should be taken into account.  The
ICO accepts that information given in the subject line can have some
relevance in informing the context of the request, the test is what the
objective reading of the request is.  However, the circumstances of
whether any information provided in a subject line is relevant to an
information request will differ from one request to another, and should be
considered in each individual case. 
 
Although in case FS50559082 it was concluded that the information
contained in the title was immaterial to the request, and did not form
part of the request, this view only applies to this particular request,
and this decision notice.  This is not an ICO policy, or ‘line to take’ in
respect of all other requests. 
 
The only other decision notice we are aware of which addresses the this
issue is [3]FER0545885, dated December 2014, but in this case the ICO
criticised a public authority for not taking account of the title (see
paragraph 28).
 
We hope this is helpful, but if you are dissatisfied with this response
and wish to request a review of our decision or make a complaint about how
your request has been handled you should write to the Information Access
Team at the address below or e-mail [4][ICO request email].
 
Your request for internal review should be submitted to us within 40
working days of receipt by you of this response.  Any such request
received after this time will only be considered at the discretion of the
Commissioner.
 
If having exhausted the review process you are not content that your
request or review has been dealt with correctly, you have a further right
of appeal to this office in our capacity as the statutory complaint
handler under the legislation.  To make such an application, please write
to our Customer Contact Team at the address given or visit our website if
you wish to make a complaint under either the Freedom of Information Act
or Environmental Information Regulations.
 
A copy of our review procedure can be accessed from our website [5]here.
 
Yours sincerely
 
 
 

Antonia Swann
Lead Information Access Officer
Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow,
Cheshire SK9 5AF
T. 01625 545894  F. 01625 524510  [6]ico.org.uk  [7]twitter.com/iconews
Please consider the environment before printing this email

 
 
 

show quoted sections

Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow,
Cheshire, SK9 5AF
Tel: 0303 123 1113 Fax: 01625 524 510 Web: www.ico.org.uk

References

Visible links
1. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/w...
2. https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio...
3. https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-tak...
4. mailto:[ICO request email]
5. https://ico.org.uk/media/about-the-ico/p...
6. http://ico.org.uk/
7. https://twitter.com/iconews

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

So this response states that although there is no guidance, the individual ICO caseworker can decide whether or not it s/he considers the summary title of the request needs to be taken into consideration.

And can edit it out - and ignore if s/he wishes to.

This begs the question what other parts of a request can be ignored?

::::

Personally I think the ICO should clear this up one way or the other.

This is a matter of who has the power to define a request:

The requester- or the individual ICO caseworker?

::::

And surely if the ICO caseworker wishes to redefine the request s/he should consult the requester for clarification - BEFORE altering the terms of the written request and so proceeding to investigate the request - in part.

Because the consideration in the request quoted is that the requester did not have mental acuity to determine the terms of their own request.

And had to be mansplainingly told what they were - as the summary title was unacceptable to the caseworker - and therefore did not have to be included.

.......But only during the Decision.

Which I find shockingly arrogant.

And not within the spirit of a fair and judicious Freedom of Information Act.

:::

Therefore, all FOIA requesters should therefore be informed in the 'T&C's' that ICO caseworkers can edit their requests - to their own personal determinations - BEFORE they carefully craft their requests.

They should not assuming that their entire request will be wholly investigated.