Richmond Mooring Byelaws 17th September 2015

Nick Brown made this Freedom of Information request to Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government

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

The request was successful.

Dear Sir

MOORING BYELAWS 17th SEPTEMBER 2014

In relation to the byelaws entitled “Mooring Byelaws” sealed by the London Borough of Richmond (“LBRoT”) Upon Thames on 17th September 2014 (the “Byelaws”):

Please provide:
1 correspondence and other documents exchanged between LBRoT and DCLG relating to the between 17th September 2014 and today's date.

2 The list of objectors to the Byelaws (the “Objectors”)

3 For the avoidance of doubt Item 1 includes the report of DCLG provided to LBRoT that analysed and commented on objections raised by the Objectors.

4 Confirmation that the Secretary of State personally evaluated the objections of the Objectors

For the avoidance of doubt this is a requisition under the Freedom of Information Act.

Yours faithfully,

Nick Brown

Despatch Box,

                            
Our reference: 826628             Information request

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
Dear Mr Brown
 
Freedom of Information Act 2000

Thank you for your request for information which was received on 26^th
February 2015, and your related email to the Department also received on
26^th February 2015. We will deal with both emails as one request under
the Freedom of Information Act 2000, reference number as above, and we aim
to respond to you by 25^th March 2015.

You requested:

1. correspondence and other documents exchanged between LB Richmond on
Thames and DCLG relating to the between 17th September 2014 and today's
date.
2 The list of objectors to the Byelaws (the Objectors)
3. For the avoidance of doubt Item 1 includes the report of DCLG provided
to LBRoT that analysed and commented on objections raised by the
Objectors.
4. Confirmation that the Secretary of State personally evaluated the
objections of the objectors.

The Freedom of Information Act 2000 may restrict the release of some or
all of the information you have requested. We will carry out an assessment
and if any exemptions apply to some or all of the information then we
might not provide that information to you. We will inform you if this is
the case and advise you of your rights to request an internal review and
to complain to the Information Commissioner's Office. 

We will also advise you if we cannot provide you with the information
requested for any other reason, together with details of how you may
appeal (if appropriate). 

Yours sincerely
 
 
Hilarie White
FoI Business Partner
 
 
NOTE: Please do not edit the subject line when replying to this email.

Nick Brown left an annotation ()

Sent by e-mail but not posted to whatdotheyknow thread....
==============================================
Subject: Information request (ref: 826628)
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 15:25:55 +0000 (GMT)
From: Ashwin Jolly <dclg@icasework.fcos.gsi.gov.uk>
To: nick.brown@bargee-traveller.org.uk

Dear Mr Brown
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Thank you for your request for information received on 25 February 2015 concerning Report sent from DCLG to LB Richmond on Thames on objections to proposed byelaws [see email correspondence].

This request is being handled under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Department for Communities and Local Government confirms that it does hold information covered by your request.

The Freedom of Information Act 2000 obliges us to respond to requests promptly, and in any case no later than 20 working days after receiving your request. However, when one or more qualified exemtions apply to the information and the Department requires further time to carry out its consideration of the balance of the public interest in disclosing the information against the public interest in withholding it, we are permitted to extend the time for response.

We now need further time in which to consider the public interest in disclosing the information.The exemptions we are considering are section 35 (1) (a) of the FOIA 2000.

We estimate that it will take an additional 20 days to take a decision on where the balance of the public interest lies. Therefore, we will respond to you by 24 April 2015.

If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request, you have the right to ask for an internal review, which should be submitted within two months of the date of receipt of this letter and should be addressed to:

Department for Communities and Local Government
Knowledge and Information Access Team
2nd Floor NW, Fry Building
2 Marsham Street
London, SW1P 4DF
dclgkia@icasework.fcos.gsi.gov.uk

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally, the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted the internal review procedure provided by the Department.

The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:
The Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF.
Phone: 0303 123 1113
Website: www.ico.gov.uk

Yours sincerely
Andrew Lock
FoI Business partner - Localism
020333 42137
andrew.lock@communities.gsi.gov.uk

Nick Brown left an annotation ()

NOTE: The whatdotheyknow system automatically adds a footer which states:
"Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
<whatdotheyknow generated e-mail address> "

A public body bound by the FoIA must comply with the obligation of s.11 FoIA which requires the public body to take account of a preferred means of correspondence. For an e-mail address to be specified with an instruction to use this e-mail address is an instruction not an expression of preference. Thus a public body that does not reply via WDTK is violating s.11 FoIA.

Further the public body will not know the e-mail address of the WDTK subscriber. WDTK observe that sometimes public bodies have been known to respond to an individual (rather than use the WDTK platform) and get the connection wrong.

It has also been observed by WDTK that there is a suggestion that some public bodies intentionally try to avoid replying via the platform. Subscribers who receive incoming responses are encouraged to re-post on the platform using "annotation". Not only does this provide the information in the public domain but also names and shames public bodies seeking to avoid exposure to potential maladministration.

FoI Requests, Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government

1 Attachment

[1]http://icasework.fcos.gsi.gov.uk/externa...

Our reference: 826628       Information request

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Jolly,

FoI Requisition 826628
Served on DCLG 26-02-2015

I observe that I served this FoI requisition on DCLG on 26th February 2015, 57 days ago. I note that you are required to respond to a FoI requisition within 20 working days.

You have on 2 occasions obfuscated in providing to me the information that I have requisitioned. This has been absent a meaningful explanation as to why you need the time that you claim that you need, in evaluating whether you consider it to be in the national interest to supply this information.

The "public interest" test provides a high hurdle for DCLG to traverse, in withholding information so requisitioned.

I am therefore dissatisfied that DCLG is engaging on a bona fide basis in the execution of its compliance obligations. I therefore requisition a review of the non-provision of the information I have requisitioned.

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 sincerely
Nick Brown

Ashwin Jolly,

Dear Mr. Brown,

Thank you for your email of 24 April 2015 in which you seek an internal
review of the late response  to your request to the Department for
Communities and Local Government for information under the Freedom of
Information Act. The Department takes very seriously its obligations to
respond to requests for information within 20 working days and we
acknowledge your request for an internal review. We apologise that your
request has not been responded to within this timescale and for any
inconvenience caused.  We will be in touch in due course.

Yours sincerely

Ashwin Jolly
Deputy FOI Business Partner

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I observe that I served this FoI requisition on DCLG on 26th February
2015, 57 days ago. I note that you are required to respond to a FoI
requisition within 20 working days. You have on 2 occasions obfuscated in
providing to me the information that I have requisitioned. This has been
absent a meaningful explanation as to why you need the time that you claim
that you need, in evaluating whether you consider it to be in the national
interest to supply this information. The "public interest" test provides a
high hurdle for DCLG to traverse, in withholding information so
requisitioned. I am therefore dissatisfied that DCLG is engaging on a bona
fide basis in the execution of its compliance obligations. I therefore
requisition a review of the non-provision of the information I have
requisitioned.

Ashwin Jolly,

15 Attachments

                            
Our reference: 826628             Information request

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
Dear Mr Brown
 
Thank you for your request for information received on 25 February 2015.
 
Please find attached our response to your request.
 
Yours sincerely
 
 
Ashwin Jolly
Deputy FOI business partner
 
 
NOTE: Please do not edit the subject line when replying to this email.

Ashwin Jolly,

                            
Our reference: 826628             Information request

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
Dear Mr Brown
 
Thank you for your request for information received on 25 February 2015.
 
I have sent  a response to your request. 

Due to the large size of the files attached, I would just like confirm
that you have received it safely.

If you have not, please advise me as soon as possible and I will resend,
splitting it between two emails.
 
Yours sincerely
 
Ashwin Jolly
Deputy FOI business partner
 
 
NOTE: Please do not edit the subject line when replying to this email.

Dear Mr Jolly
Please can I confirm that I have received all of the documents that you have transmitted to me.
Thank you for your assistance
Yours sincerely
Nick Brown