Review by SCC concerning a H&S incident/conviction concerning in Amey

Waiting for an internal review by Sheffield City Council of their handling of this request.

Dear Sheffield City Council,

In an email from Paul Billington to myself (dated 16th November 2017), he claims that a 'review' by Council officers took place following a health and safety fatality/conviction involving Amey being brought to SCC's attention when it was reported in the media in 2011.

I would like copies of documentation pertaining to this review (including but not limited to the minutes taken) with details of when the review took place, which Council officers were involved in the review, what was considered in the review, how the decision was arrived at in relation to the outcome, and the communication of that outcome to John Mothersole (Project Sponsor) and also the PFI Project Board (comprising John Mothersole, Laraine Manley, Simon Green, John Charlton, Frances Woodhead).

When doing so, please provide original Microsoft Word documents (except where evidence was not produced in Word), not scans or pdf conversions.

As these documents relate to the winning bidder of the PFI contract, they should have been retained in accordance with the Council's Constitution. Furthermore, this information would not be considered to be 'financially sensitive' as it contains no information of a commercial or financial nature, nor would it be a breach of confidentiality as details of the H&S fatality and conviction already reside in the public domain.

Yours faithfully,
Richard Davis

FOI, Sheffield City Council

Sheffield City Council is closed for all but essential services from the
afternoon of Friday 22nd December 2017 and reopening on Tuesday 2nd
January 2018. During this closure period Freedom of Information requests
and related correspondence will not be monitored. All emails received will
be reviewed and processed from Tuesday 2nd January. Please note, there may
be a slight delay in response or acknowledgment of your request as a
result of this closure.

This Email, and any attachments, may contain non-public information and is
intended solely for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It may
contain sensitive or protectively marked material and should be handled
accordingly. If this Email has been misdirected, please notify the author
immediately. If you are not the intended recipient you must not disclose,
distribute, copy, print or rely on any of the information contained in it
or attached, and all copies must be deleted immediately. Whilst we take
reasonable steps to try to identify any software viruses, any attachments
to this Email may nevertheless contain viruses which our anti-virus
software has failed to identify. You should therefore carry out your own
anti-virus checks before opening any documents. Sheffield City Council
will not accept any liability for damage caused by computer viruses
emanating from any attachment or other document supplied with this e-mail

FOI, Sheffield City Council

Re – Freedom of Information Request – Reference – FOI / 1487
 
Dear Richard Davis,
 
Thank you for your recent request for information relating to
Documentation Relating to "Review” which we received on 29/12/17.
 
This has been logged as a Freedom of Information Request, and will be
dealt with under the Freedom of Information Act.  The reference number for
your request can be found above.
 
The Freedom of Information Act states that we must respond to you within
20 working days, therefore, you should expect to hear a response from us
by 29/01/18.
 
In the meantime, if you have any queries please contact us on the number
below.
 
Thank you.
 
Yours sincerely,
 
Resources Business Support
Moorfoot Level 2 North Wing
Sheffield S1 4PL
Tel : 0114 20 53478
E-mail : [1][Sheffield City Council request email]
P Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to
 
 

show quoted sections

FOI, Sheffield City Council

2 Attachments

Re – Freedom of Information Request – Reference – FOI / 1487
 
Dear Richard Davis,
 
Thank you for your recent request for information relating to
Documentation Relating to "Review” which we received on 29/12/17.
 
Please find below, Sheffield City Council’s response to your request:
 
Please find attached the beginning of a chain of emails evidencing that
the council were aware of the H&S conviction in 2011 you refer to in your
request for information. This information is provided in PDF format to
allow for the redaction of relevant information and was previously held in
a message format and not a word document. Please not the Freedom of
Information Act provides you with a right of access to information held by
a public authority and not the specific documents they are held in (this
would cause issue with the technical redaction of information, where
applicable). Owing to legal professional privilege, there are later emails
in this chain which are exempt from disclosure (Please see the attached
refusal notice). You will note that officer names have been redacted in
accordance with protections provided to individuals under Section 40(2) of
the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and Principle 1 of the Data Protection
Act 1998 that information will be processed both fairly and lawfully.
 
These are the only documents relating to this subject matter which the
Council holds.
 
 
If you have any queries about this response, please do not hesitate to
contact us.
 
If you are unhappy with the response you have received in relation to your
request, you are entitled to have this reviewed.  You can ask for an
internal review by either writing to the above address or by emailing
[1][Sheffield City Council request email].
 
If you remain dissatisfied with the outcome of your internal review, you
can contact the Information Commissioners Office. The Information
Commissioner can be contacted at: The Information Commissioner's Office,
Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF, telephone 0303 123
1113, or for further details see their website [2]www.ico.org.uk
 
Kind Regards,
 
Resources Business Support
Moorfoot Level 2 North Wing
Sheffield S1 4PL
Tel : 0114 20 53478
E-mail : [3][Sheffield City Council request email]
P Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to
 
 
_____________________________________________

show quoted sections

Dear Sheffield City Council,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Sheffield City Council's handling of my FOI request 'Review by SCC concerning a H&S incident/conviction concerning in Amey'.

I have reasonable grounds to assert that the information provided is false. Firstly, the hyperlink is a dead link, the correct link is actually: https://www.shponline.co.uk/worker-fell-...
There could be a valid argument that the link has changed, but there is also an equal argument that the link has never changed.

Secondly, the font changes colour during the first email with regard to the named bidders. I also have one further suspicion as to the authenticity of these emails.

As you mentioned in your response, it is an email message not a Word document, therefore the message will be in the format of a .eml file
Could you please provide details of the .eml document properties (this is done quickly and easily by right clicking on the email and selecting 'Properties'. It can also be achieved by saving the email by right clicking the email and 'Save as' which will save it on your desktop or a folder as a .eml file - then right click the saved file and select 'Properties'. Your IT department should be sufficiently competent to do this. Please take a PHOTO of the .eml file properties, NOT a screen grab. If it details the sender and or recipient(s), please disguise accordingly.

I would also like further details of the alleged 'review' which according to Paul Billington was undertaken by Council officers. Th email thread provided is neither indicative of, or proof of, a review having taken place by Council officers. If there is anything of a legally privileged nature in the 'review' by SCC and its legal representatives, please redact it but leave all remaining SCC content intact that is not legally privileged.

Thank you
R.Davis

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,

Richard Davis

FOI, Sheffield City Council

Re – Freedom of Information Request – Reference – FOI/1487
 
Dear Richard Davis,
 
Thank you for your recent request for a review of the Freedom of
Information response provided to you.  Your response related to
information regarding Documentation Relating to "Review”.
 
We are sorry to hear that you are not happy with your response.
 
I am writing to acknowledge your request for a review, which we received
on 26/02/18.  This has now been logged and will be carried out by a member
of the team.
 
We will endeavour to provide a response within 20 working days, in this
case, by 23/02/18.
 
In the meantime, if you have any queries please contact the team on 0114
2734567.
 
Thank you.
 
Yours sincerely,
 
Resources Business Support
Moorfoot Level 2 North Wing
Sheffield S1 4PL
Tel : 0114 20 53478
E-mail : [1]FOI @sheffield.gov.uk
P Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
 
_____________________________________________
From: Richard Davis [[2]mailto:[FOI #454364 email]]
Sent: 26 January 2018 17:34
To: FOI
Subject: Internal review of Freedom of Information request - Review by SCC
concerning a H&S incident/conviction concerning in Amey
 
 
Dear Sheffield City Council,
 
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information
reviews.
 
I am writing to request an internal review of Sheffield City Council's
handling of my FOI request 'Review by SCC concerning a H&S
incident/conviction concerning in Amey'.
 
I have reasonable grounds to assert that the information provided is
false. Firstly, the hyperlink is a dead link, the correct link is
actually:
[3]https://www.shponline.co.uk/worker-fell-...
There could be a valid argument that the link has changed, but there is
also an equal argument that the link has never changed.
 
Secondly, the font changes colour during the first email with regard to
the named bidders. I also have one further suspicion as to the
authenticity of these emails.
 
As you mentioned in your response, it is an email message not a Word
document, therefore the message will be in the format of a .eml file Could
you please provide details of the .eml document properties (this is done
quickly and easily by right clicking on the email and selecting
'Properties'. It can also be achieved by saving the email by right
clicking the email and 'Save as' which will save it on your desktop or a
folder as a .eml file - then right click the saved file and select
'Properties'. Your IT department should be sufficiently competent to do
this. Please take a PHOTO of the .eml file properties, NOT a screen grab.
If it details the sender and or recipient(s), please disguise accordingly.
 
I would also like further details of the alleged 'review' which according
to Paul Billington was undertaken by Council officers. Th email thread
provided is neither indicative of, or proof of, a review having taken
place by Council officers. If there is anything of a legally privileged
nature in the 'review' by SCC and its legal representatives, please redact
it but leave all remaining SCC content intact that is not legally
privileged.
 
Thank you
R.Davis
 
A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on
the Internet at this address:
[4]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/r...
 
Yours faithfully,
 
Richard Davis
 
 
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[5][FOI #454364 email]
 
Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
[6]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/offi...
 
For more detailed guidance on safely disclosing information, read the
latest advice from the ICO:
[7]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/ico-...
 
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will
be delayed.
 
If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web
manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.
 

show quoted sections

Dear FOI,

As part of the internal review, I would also like the following to be considered.

As I already know the answer to the question asked in the email at the top of the page (from previous FOI requests), that the incident SHOULD have been reported in the PQQ by Amey, and that they DID NOT do so, could you please provide a copy of the response to this question by the person to whom it was sent. It is relevant in the context of my enquiry.

The second email down the page makes reference to trade unions (TUs). Can you provide details of any information provide to any Trade Union in this regard, and any information or advice provided by the Trade Union(s) in return.

Yours sincerely,

Richard Davis

Dear FOI,

I forgot to mention in my previous email.

The question about whether Amey did/should have declared this incident in their PQQ submission was sent internally to HighwaysProcurementTeam at SCC, therefore is not subject to legal privilege. Could you please advise what the response was of the HighwaysProcurementTeam to this question.

Yours sincerely,

Richard Davis

Vincent Bowdren left an annotation ()

As to whether the URL was correct at the time of the original message, it is possible to check using archive.org's "wayback machine", a public record of snapshots of many websites at points in their history.

This does confirm that the page did exist with the old URL, as of January 2012, as can be seen here:
https://web.archive.org/web/201201111826...

I hope this helps.

Looking for an EU Authority?

You can request documents directly from EU Institutions at our sister site AskTheEU.org . Find out more .

AskTheEU.org