Dear Post Office Limited, this is a Freedom of Information request. Please provide copies of all documents relating to the reasons for the closure and possible reopening timelines for the Billingham Post Office located at 53 Queensway, Billingham, TS23 2ND.

Yours faithfully,

Graeme Robertson

Dear [email address] representative,
Re your ref FOI2024/00333
More than 20 working days have passed since this FOI Act 2000 request for information was submitted to you. No response has been provided, other than acknowledgement of receipt.
As you have failed to meet your obligations under the Act, I suggest that you respond as soon as possible in order that I do not have to consider a call for you to hold an internal review.

Yours sincerely,

Graeme Robertson

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 'Reason for closure of branch. The Internal review should consider the seven points below and be directed towards providing the actual information I requested rather than a set of irrelevant linked publications which do not provide it.

1. My FOI called for the following information: "Please provide copies of all documents relating to the reasons for the closure and possible reopening timelines for the Billingham Post Office located at 53 Queensway, Billingham, TS23 2ND. "

2. Your response document FOIA Response FOI2024 00333.pdf stated:
"We can confirm that Post Office does hold the information you have requested. We are working to restore Post Office services at Billingham and apologise for any inconvenience this temporary closure may cause.
Copies of documentation relating to Billingham branch is available on our national consultation hub:
https://www.postofficeviews.co.uk/nation...
347327/
As the information is reasonably accessible to you by other means, Post Office are not required to provide a copy of the information with this response, under section 21 of the FOIA."

3. The consultation hub link in your response does NOT contain the information I have requested. It contains three irrelevent publications.
a. A generic Post Office FAQ document relating to proposed closures of Post Office Branches.
b. A document outlining a proposal for the branch to be run by Jassraaj Enterprise Ltd once relocated from a previous address to the current one.
c. A letter stating that "due to unforeseen circumstances, the .... branch closed temporarily on Wednesday 30 August 2023" adding that "We are working to restore Post Office services at Billingham".

4. The only piece of information that has any relevance to the request is a statement on the letter from Gail Burnett, (Network Provision Lead) that the branch had to be closed due to "unforseen circumstances" & that Post Office Ltd were "working to restore Post Office services at Billingham" in both her letter and your response document to this FOI.

5. That information does not amount to a viable answer to the scope of the request i.e. documents held by the Post Office relating to the reasons for the closure.

6. The true reasons for the closure and the work taking place to "restore Post Office services at Billingham" must be held and stored as documents and E Mail messages by Post Office Ltd. You have not provided any of these publications (with redactions if necessary).

7. You have therefore incorrectly interpretted & applied the provisions of Section 21 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 with respect to your response to my request.

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

Yours faithfully, Graeme Robertson

Dear [email address], I called on you to hold an internal review on April 2nd 2024. You did not contact me back until April 16th 2024 , informing that my call for the internal review was assigned to a case worker . I have heard nothing from you since then. Guidance from the Information Commissioner states that organisations "should acknowledge an internal review request and provide a target date for response, which should usually be within 20 working days". You have failed to provide a target date for the review to be held in that timescale. If you do not provide an update by 25/05/2024, I will be minded to lodge a formal complaint to the Information Commissioner and call on them to instruct you to provide the information requested.

Yours sincerely,

Graeme Robertson

Dear [email address], I gave advance notice that I would consider lodging a complaint to, and seek assistance from the Information Commissioner in being provided with the Information I am seeking from you. Over 40 working days have elapsed since I called on you to hold an internal review for this Freedom of Information request. Other than being told the call for the internal review was assigned to a case worker, I have received no further communcation from you.
I notify you that I have lodged a complaint and a request to be provided with the Information sought, to the office of the Information Commissioner.
Yours sincerely,
Graeme Robertson

Dear [email address],
Your response regading an undated internal review does not acknowledge that I have already lodged a complaint to the Office of the Information Commissioner about your failure to provide the information requested & your failure to hold the internal review within 40 working days of being asked.

Buried deep amongst your 7th June 2024 response is a small screenshot from what purports to be a public document stating that the business partner went into administration - what you had the public believe were "unforseen circumstances". This is the only additional information you have provided. I knew about the financial situation of the former business partner via Companies House records anyway.
https://find-and-update.company-informat...

The Post Office must hold internal E mails, memos etc about the former business partners' financial difficulties & the circumstances in which those difficulties could & did result in branch closure. Furthermore, the Post office must hold documentation relating to views about the duration of the closure, timescale for re opening, and what progress, if any, has been sought in finding a different business partner and possibly a new branch location.

I do not intend to withdraw the complaint to the Information Commissioner as you have still not provided the information requested in your latest response of 7th June 2024.

Yours sincerely,

Graeme Robertson

Dear [email address], thanks for your recent update to this Freedom of Information request, the contents of which, along with the supplied disclosure I have read and noted.
There is nothing present in your update that has persuaded me to discontinue my complaint about the handling of my Freedom of Information request with the Office of the Information Commissioner. Whilst we await the outcome of their deliberations I provide my response below to it.

(a) You state you have identified what you describe as “a further relevant extract from the NCT (National Consultation Team) Proforma, which relates to the reopening of the branch”. I assume this was provided as Attachment IR2024 00615 Disclosure Redacted.pdf This information surely could & should have already been provided as part of the initial response. If so, I would have been made aware earlier that you received an Email from Billingham Town Council (referred to by you as “the Parish Council”) regarding the setting up of a pop up Post Office.

(b) I have observed an inconsistency in that extract document: On 3 October 2023, that you wrote to another party informing them that you were “looking to try and put a" temp" in the closed branch to re-open however the temps are having difficulties agreeing terms with the landlord.” However on October 12th, you informed another party that “we (Post Office) are looking at a temporary postmaster to run the Post Office service at the same branch premises,
however, we (Post Office) are having difficulties agreeing terms with the landlord. This is conflicting information because you in one instance claim the “temps” are having difficulty agreeing terms, then later say that the Post Office itself is having difficulty agreeing term instead.

(c) You have finally declared that you do hold emails relating to the closure and re-opening of Billingham Post Office branch. However you then add that “We can confirm we have no further information to disclose regarding the reasons for the closure and re-opening”. This comes across to me as a deliberately ambiguously worded phrase, meaning in reality you have no intention to disclose further information relating to the closure and re-opening of Billingham Post Office branch.
You do assert that you have applied exemptions under sections 40(2) and 40(3A) of the FOIA as reasons for withholding some information, but if that actually is the case, copies of it with appropriate redactions could have been supplied.

(d) I disagree with your assertion there is a ”strong public interes"t in withholding the information (that you claim an exemption for under section 43(2) of the FOIA) as it would, if disclosed, prejudice the commercial interests of Post Office”. That “strong public interest” should have been backed up with clarification that a real public interest test was actually undertaken, and if the exemptions were absolute or qualified. The Office of the Information Commissioner will come to their view about that.

(e) Since the Post Office provides its own unique counter services, branded insurance & telecommunication products etc, it isn’t clear to me why disclosing the information requested would mean you “would be unable to operate in fair marketplace” or how you would be “commercially damaged” by the release of the information”. If my understanding is correct, the competitive dialogue procedure applies to the procurement of goods and services for public bodies & is in my view irrelevant with regard to the information I seek.

Yours sincerely,

Graeme Robertson

Dear [email address], the Information Commissioner case officer stipulated that you had to provide additional information within 30 calendar days from 06/11/2024 - the date of her decision notice. May I respectfully remind you that you have not done this yet, and have little more than a week remaining to do so.

Yours sincerely,

Graeme Robertson