Taking Control of Goods (fees) Regulations 2014

The request was partially successful.

Dear Mid Sussex District Council,

Theoretically, if an Enforcement Agent is instructed to recover a sum outstanding on a Liability Order of £420, the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 provides that the Agent may recover a compliance fee currently in the sum of £75. If the Agent then proceeds to the enforcement stage incurring a fee of £235, then to the sale or disposal of controlled goods stage, incurring a further £110, then the amount the Enforcement Agent may recover from the debtor would be a sum equal to the amount outstanding on the Liability Order.

If the debtor then pays a sum equal to the amount outstanding on the Liability Order, but no more than this, by virtue of the Regulations the enforcement agent is entitled to the entire sum originally owed, with the council seeing nothing from the recovery process.

Q. In respect of payments for outstanding Council Tax as in the above or similar, what (if any) measures have Mid Sussex District Council in place (presumably contractual) that ensures monies are not diverted to enrich private companies and their shareholders that would otherwise have gone towards providing services (the purpose intended)?

Yours faithfully,

Paul Smith

Freedom of Information, Mid Sussex District Council

Thank you for your email. If the email contains a request for information,
the 20 working day countdown will start on the first working day after
receipt of this request.

 

The request may be subject to an exemption, which the Authority is
entitled to apply to refuse the request. We will notify you if this is the
case.

 

Once the information has been identified the Authority may also ask that a
fee be paid for processing and delivering the information to you. Details
of any fee to be charged will be notified to you as soon as possible.

 

Any future correspondence you may have in relation to this matter should
be sent to the Senior Information Governance Officer, Mid Sussex District
Council, Oaklands, Oaklands Road, Haywards Heath, West Sussex RH16 1SS, or
by return to this email.

 

Information provided under the FOI Act 2000 or the Environmental
Information Regulations 2004 may be not be re-used, except for personal
study and non-commercial research or for news reporting and reviews,
without the permission of the Council. Please see the Council website
www.midsussex.gov.uk/page.cfm?pageID=4084  for further information or
contact Service Improvement on 01444 477422.

 

Kind regards,

 

FOI/DPA Team

 

 

The information contained in this email may be subject to public
disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Unless the
information contained in this email is legally exempt from disclosure, we
cannot guarantee that we will not provide the whole or part of this email
to a third party making a request for information about the subject matter
of this email.

This email and any attachments may contain confidential information and is
intended only to be seen and used by the named addressees. If you are not
the named addressee, any use, disclosure, copying, alteration or
forwarding of this email and its attachments is unauthorised. If you have
received this email in error please notify the sender immediately by email
or by calling +44 (0) 1444 458 166 and remove this email and its
attachments from your system.

The views expressed within this email and any attachments are not
necessarily the views or policies of Mid Sussex District Council. We have
taken precautions to minimise the risk of transmitting software viruses,
but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks before accessing this
email and any attachments. Except where required by law, we shall not be
responsible for any damage, loss or liability of any kind suffered in
connection with this email and any attachments, or which may result from
reliance on the contents of this email and any attachments.

Freedom of Information, Mid Sussex District Council

Dear Mr Smith,

Thank you for your request for information. Please find our response below.

The £75 Compliance fee is payable first. Payments made towards cases where an Enforcement Fee has been applied are split on a pro rata basis. Therefore in the scenario suggested there would be a proportionate balance of both debt and fees paid & outstanding. The rationale is that the final payment would clear the remaining proportionate amount of debt and fees, so they would both be paid in full at the same time

If for whatever reason you are unhappy with our response you are entitled to pursue any dissatisfaction, in the first instance, by contacting Tom Clark, Solicitor to the Council, Mid Sussex District Council, Oaklands, Oaklands Road, Haywards Heath, West Sussex, RH16 1SS, email: [email address], quoting your FOI Reference Number.
 
If you still remain dissatisfied with the response you can complain to the Information Commissioner - details available at: https://www.ico.gov.uk/Global/contact_us...
 
Information provided under the FOI Act 2000 or the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 may be not be re-used, except for personal study and non-commercial research or for news reporting and reviews, without the permission of the Council. Please see the Council website www.midsussex.gov.uk/page.cfm?pageID=4084  for further information or contact the FOI Team on 01444 477422.
 
yours sincerely,

FOI/DPA Team
----------------------------------------------------------------
Performance and Partnerships
01444 477422
[Mid Sussex District Council request email]
http://www.midsussex.gov.uk/6559.htm
 
Working together for a better Mid Sussex

show quoted sections

Dear Mid Sussex District Council,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Mid Sussex District Council's handling of my FOI request 'Taking Control of Goods (fees) Regulations 2014'.

Re;

"The £75 Compliance fee is payable first. Payments made towards cases where an Enforcement Fee has been applied are split on a pro rata basis. Therefore in the scenario suggested there would be a proportionate balance of both debt and fees paid & outstanding. The rationale is that the final payment would clear the remaining proportionate amount of debt and fees, so they would both be paid in full at the same time"

In order to outline my request for review, I must assume that the taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 (where proceeds are less than the amount outstanding), payments made are treated equally as for where goods are sold.

Regulation 13 implies that it provides only for the application of proceeds where goods are sold. However, even if pro-rata payments are applicable where goods are not sold, there is still potential, where proceeds are less than the amount outstanding, for substantial sums benefiting the Enforcement Agent which should be going to the public purse.

In cases where only a sum of £75 appears on the liability order and the debtor pays only that amount, then all those cases will result in the local authority seeing nothing from the recovery process and the contractor benefiting at the expense of the taxpayer.

Even in the original example (where the Enforcement Agent is instructed to recover a sum outstanding on a Liability Order of £420 and the debtor pays only that amount) then the local authority would only see £189.41 whilst the contractor would have diverted £230.59 from council services.

That is of course unless there are contractual rules imposed that would serve the public interest in that the contractor is paid only when the full amount outstanding is recovered, thereby giving maximum benefit to the public purse.

Monies diverted from funds available to spend on public services in the first example is a wholly unacceptable 100%, even the second example, the percentage (55%) of the payment made by the account holder is still considerable and unacceptable. Council Taxpayers would therefore quite rightly be entitled to question how, in these circumstances, the council is permitted to hand over their Council Tax payments to private companies.

The new regulations have left the door open to negotiate contracts. The authority may take advantage of paragraph (1) of Regulation 4 and paragraph (3) of Regulation 13 and contractually require full payment of the "amount outstanding" as it only states that the enforcement agent "MAY" recover from the debtor the fees (Regulation 4) and "MAY" recover the compliance fee (Regulation 13).

"Recovery of fees for enforcement-related services from the debtor

4.—(1) — The enforcement agent may recover from the debtor the fees indicated in the Schedule in accordance with this regulation and regulations 11, 12, 13, 16 and 17, by reference to the stage, or stages, of enforcement for which enforcement-related services have been supplied.
..........

Application of proceeds where less than the amount outstanding

13.—(1).....

(3) Following the payment at paragraph (2), the enforcement agent may then recover the compliance fee.
...."

SECONDLY

The response makes no distinction between monies collected by Mid Sussex District Council's Enforcement Agents and monies paid directly to the Council. Presumably the response has been given with no accounting for payments received by the council paid directly from the account holder (no law states that a debtor must deal with a bailiff).

There obviously then becomes an issue when the person owing the money doesn't pay the Council's Enforcement Agent, but pays instead, the Council itself. Presumably then regulation 13 of the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 has no validity, and if the council allows its Enforcement Agent to allocate monies pro-rata will be acting unlawfully?

In any event, for Mid Sussex District Council to allow its Enforcement Agent access to resident's council tax accounts would be equally unlawful.

In essence, the purpose of this review is to have Mid Sussex District Council disclose details of measures it has in place that would serve the public interest in that the contractor is paid only when the full amount outstanding is recovered, thereby giving maximum benefit to the public purse.

In order to clarify what was originally requested, it has been re-worded (see below):

"Please provide recorded information the Council holds of any agreements / contracts in place detailing that the Enforcement Agent would be entitled to fees, only in a sum equal to the amount collected over and above the outstanding debt, with the purpose of protecting the council's/taxpayer's interest."

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

Yours faithfully,

Paul Smith

Freedom of Information, Mid Sussex District Council

Thank you for your email. If the email contains a request for information,
the 20 working day countdown will start on the first working day after
receipt of this request.

 

The request may be subject to an exemption, which the Authority is
entitled to apply to refuse the request. We will notify you if this is the
case.

 

Once the information has been identified the Authority may also ask that a
fee be paid for processing and delivering the information to you. Details
of any fee to be charged will be notified to you as soon as possible.

 

Any future correspondence you may have in relation to this matter should
be sent to the Senior Information Governance Officer, Mid Sussex District
Council, Oaklands, Oaklands Road, Haywards Heath, West Sussex RH16 1SS, or
by return to this email.

 

Information provided under the FOI Act 2000 or the Environmental
Information Regulations 2004 may be not be re-used, except for personal
study and non-commercial research or for news reporting and reviews,
without the permission of the Council. Please see the Council website
www.midsussex.gov.uk/page.cfm?pageID=4084  for further information or
contact Service Improvement on 01444 477422.

 

Kind regards,

 

FOI/DPA Team

 

 

The information contained in this email may be subject to public
disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Unless the
information contained in this email is legally exempt from disclosure, we
cannot guarantee that we will not provide the whole or part of this email
to a third party making a request for information about the subject matter
of this email.

This email and any attachments may contain confidential information and is
intended only to be seen and used by the named addressees. If you are not
the named addressee, any use, disclosure, copying, alteration or
forwarding of this email and its attachments is unauthorised. If you have
received this email in error please notify the sender immediately by email
or by calling +44 (0) 1444 458 166 and remove this email and its
attachments from your system.

The views expressed within this email and any attachments are not
necessarily the views or policies of Mid Sussex District Council. We have
taken precautions to minimise the risk of transmitting software viruses,
but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks before accessing this
email and any attachments. Except where required by law, we shall not be
responsible for any damage, loss or liability of any kind suffered in
connection with this email and any attachments, or which may result from
reliance on the contents of this email and any attachments.

Freedom of Information, Mid Sussex District Council

Dear Mr Smith,

Your request for a review is still being considered. We had hoped to have a full reply for you today, however, we are waiting on some finalised discussions with our bailiffs regarding the release of certain documents and will send a full reply as soon as we have the result of these discussions.

yours sincerely,

FOI/DPA Team
Performance and Partnerships
01444 477422
[Mid Sussex District Council request email]
http://www.midsussex.gov.uk/6559.htm
Working together for a better Mid Sussex

show quoted sections

Freedom of Information, Mid Sussex District Council

Dear Mr Smith,

We have been asked to send a response on behalf of Mr Clark, Solicitor to the Council.

We are currently in consultation with the bailiffs about disclosure of the SLAs this Council has with them and expect to give a full response to your internal review request in the next 10 working days.

yours sincerely,

FOI/DPA Team
Performance and Partnerships
01444 477422
[Mid Sussex District Council request email]
http://www.midsussex.gov.uk/6559.htm
Working together for a better Mid Sussex

Dear Mid Sussex District Council,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Mid Sussex District Council's handling of my FOI request 'Taking Control of Goods (fees) Regulations 2014'.

Re;

"The £75 Compliance fee is payable first. Payments made towards cases where an Enforcement Fee has been applied are split on a pro rata basis. Therefore in the scenario suggested there would be a proportionate balance of both debt and fees paid & outstanding. The rationale is that the final payment would clear the remaining proportionate amount of debt and fees, so they would both be paid in full at the same time"

In order to outline my request for review, I must assume that the taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 (where proceeds are less than the amount outstanding), payments made are treated equally as for where goods are sold.

Regulation 13 implies that it provides only for the application of proceeds where goods are sold. However, even if pro-rata payments are applicable where goods are not sold, there is still potential, where proceeds are less than the amount outstanding, for substantial sums benefiting the Enforcement Agent which should be going to the public purse.

In cases where only a sum of £75 appears on the liability order and the debtor pays only that amount, then all those cases will result in the local authority seeing nothing from the recovery process and the contractor benefiting at the expense of the taxpayer.

Even in the original example (where the Enforcement Agent is instructed to recover a sum outstanding on a Liability Order of £420 and the debtor pays only that amount) then the local authority would only see £189.41 whilst the contractor would have diverted £230.59 from council services.

That is of course unless there are contractual rules imposed that would serve the public interest in that the contractor is paid only when the full amount outstanding is recovered, thereby giving maximum benefit to the public purse.

Monies diverted from funds available to spend on public services in the first example is a wholly unacceptable 100%, even the second example, the percentage (55%) of the payment made by the account holder is still considerable and unacceptable. Council Taxpayers would therefore quite rightly be entitled to question how, in these circumstances, the council is permitted to hand over their Council Tax payments to private companies.

The new regulations have left the door open to negotiate contracts. The authority may take advantage of paragraph (1) of Regulation 4 and paragraph (3) of Regulation 13 and contractually require full payment of the "amount outstanding" as it only states that the enforcement agent "MAY" recover from the debtor the fees (Regulation 4) and "MAY" recover the compliance fee (Regulation 13).

"Recovery of fees for enforcement-related services from the debtor

4.—(1) — The enforcement agent may recover from the debtor the fees indicated in the Schedule in accordance with this regulation and regulations 11, 12, 13, 16 and 17, by reference to the stage, or stages, of enforcement for which enforcement-related services have been supplied.
..........

Application of proceeds where less than the amount outstanding

13.—(1).....

(3) Following the payment at paragraph (2), the enforcement agent may then recover the compliance fee.
...."

SECONDLY

The response makes no distinction between monies collected by Mid Sussex District Council's Enforcement Agents and monies paid directly to the Council. Presumably the response has been given with no accounting for payments received by the council paid directly from the account holder (no law states that a debtor must deal with a bailiff).

There obviously then becomes an issue when the person owing the money doesn't pay the Council's Enforcement Agent, but pays instead, the Council itself. Presumably then regulation 13 of the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 has no validity, and if the council allows its Enforcement Agent to allocate monies pro-rata will be acting unlawfully?

In any event, for Mid Sussex District Council to allow its Enforcement Agent access to resident's council tax accounts would be equally unlawful.

In essence, the purpose of this review is to have Mid Sussex District Council disclose details of measures it has in place that would serve the public interest in that the contractor is paid only when the full amount outstanding is recovered, thereby giving maximum benefit to the public purse.

In order to clarify what was originally requested, it has been re-worded (see below):

"Please provide recorded information the Council holds of any agreements / contracts in place detailing that the Enforcement Agent would be entitled to fees, only in a sum equal to the amount collected over and above the outstanding debt, with the purpose of protecting the council's/taxpayer's interest."

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

Yours faithfully,

Paul Smith

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #212226 email]

Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/help/offi...

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 Freedom of Information,

Here's a reminder about your message (below) of 4 July 2014.

"We are currently in consultation with the bailiffs about disclosure of the SLAs this Council has with them and expect to give a full response to your internal review request in the next 10 working days"

Yours sincerely,

Paul Smith

Freedom of Information, Mid Sussex District Council

Thank you for your email. If the email contains a request for information,
the 20 working day countdown will start on the first working day after
receipt of this request.

 

The request may be subject to an exemption, which the Authority is
entitled to apply to refuse the request. We will notify you if this is the
case.

 

Once the information has been identified the Authority may also ask that a
fee be paid for processing and delivering the information to you. Details
of any fee to be charged will be notified to you as soon as possible.

 

Any future correspondence you may have in relation to this matter should
be sent to the Senior Information Governance Officer, Mid Sussex District
Council, Oaklands, Oaklands Road, Haywards Heath, West Sussex RH16 1SS, or
by return to this email.

 

Information provided under the FOI Act 2000 or the Environmental
Information Regulations 2004 may be not be re-used, except for personal
study and non-commercial research or for news reporting and reviews,
without the permission of the Council. Please see the Council website
www.midsussex.gov.uk/page.cfm?pageID=4084  for further information or
contact Service Improvement on 01444 477422.

 

Kind regards,

 

FOI/DPA Team

 

 

The information contained in this email may be subject to public
disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Unless the
information contained in this email is legally exempt from disclosure, we
cannot guarantee that we will not provide the whole or part of this email
to a third party making a request for information about the subject matter
of this email.

This email and any attachments may contain confidential information and is
intended only to be seen and used by the named addressees. If you are not
the named addressee, any use, disclosure, copying, alteration or
forwarding of this email and its attachments is unauthorised. If you have
received this email in error please notify the sender immediately by email
or by calling +44 (0) 1444 458 166 and remove this email and its
attachments from your system.

The views expressed within this email and any attachments are not
necessarily the views or policies of Mid Sussex District Council. We have
taken precautions to minimise the risk of transmitting software viruses,
but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks before accessing this
email and any attachments. Except where required by law, we shall not be
responsible for any damage, loss or liability of any kind suffered in
connection with this email and any attachments, or which may result from
reliance on the contents of this email and any attachments.

Dear Freedom of Information,

(Email 25 September 2014 )

Here's a reminder about your message (below) of 4 July 2014.

"We are currently in consultation with the bailiffs about
disclosure of the SLAs this Council has with them and expect to
give a full response to your internal review request in the next 10
working days"

Yours sincerely,

Paul Smith

Freedom of Information, Mid Sussex District Council

Thank you for your email. If the email contains a request for information,
the 20 working day countdown will start on the first working day after
receipt of this request.

 

The request may be subject to an exemption, which the Authority is
entitled to apply to refuse the request. We will notify you if this is the
case.

 

Once the information has been identified the Authority may also ask that a
fee be paid for processing and delivering the information to you. Details
of any fee to be charged will be notified to you as soon as possible.

 

Any future correspondence you may have in relation to this matter should
be sent to the Senior Information Governance Officer, Mid Sussex District
Council, Oaklands, Oaklands Road, Haywards Heath, West Sussex RH16 1SS, or
by return to this email.

 

Information provided under the FOI Act 2000 or the Environmental
Information Regulations 2004 may be not be re-used, except for personal
study and non-commercial research or for news reporting and reviews,
without the permission of the Council. Please see the Council website
www.midsussex.gov.uk/page.cfm?pageID=4084  for further information or
contact Service Improvement on 01444 477422.

 

Kind regards,

 

FOI/DPA Team

 

 

The information contained in this email may be subject to public
disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Unless the
information contained in this email is legally exempt from disclosure, we
cannot guarantee that we will not provide the whole or part of this email
to a third party making a request for information about the subject matter
of this email.

This email and any attachments may contain confidential information and is
intended only to be seen and used by the named addressees. If you are not
the named addressee, any use, disclosure, copying, alteration or
forwarding of this email and its attachments is unauthorised. If you have
received this email in error please notify the sender immediately by email
or by calling +44 (0) 1444 458 166 and remove this email and its
attachments from your system.

The views expressed within this email and any attachments are not
necessarily the views or policies of Mid Sussex District Council. We have
taken precautions to minimise the risk of transmitting software viruses,
but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks before accessing this
email and any attachments. Except where required by law, we shall not be
responsible for any damage, loss or liability of any kind suffered in
connection with this email and any attachments, or which may result from
reliance on the contents of this email and any attachments.

Freedom of Information, Mid Sussex District Council

Dear Mr Smith,

Please accept our apologies for the delay in responding. We have been negotiating redacted versions of the SLAs with our bailiffs for some time now and we are still waiting for a final agreed versions, which we will release once sorted. We can, however, confirm that the agreement follows the requirements of the 2014 Regulations in allowing the monies recovered to be shared between the Council and the bailiffs until both the original property debt and the bailiff costs are paid in full. You are not correct in your assertion that the 2014 Regulations mean the bailiff is not entitled to any payment until the monies owed to the Council are paid in full. The bailiff’s costs can of course be avoided if the property taxes are paid in a timely manner, with most people paying by direct debit.

If you are dissatisfied with this review you may make a complaint to the information commissioner whose details you will find on his web site

yours sincerely,

FOI/DPA Team
Performance and Partnerships
01444 477422
[Mid Sussex District Council request email]
http://www.midsussex.gov.uk/6559.htm
Working together for a better Mid Sussex

show quoted sections

Dear Freedom of Information,

Quote:

"The bailiff’s costs can of course be avoided if the property taxes are paid in a timely manner, with most people paying by direct debit."

This is a freedom of information request and as such don't think it appropriate that Mid Sussex District Council exploit the opportunity of responding to it by plugging its preferred method of payment.

I will be looking into whether Mid Sussex District Council exploit this in other ways; for example waiving summons costs in exchange for potential victims converting the way they pay their council tax to direct debit.

Yours sincerely,

Paul Smith

Freedom of Information, Mid Sussex District Council

Thank you for your email. If the email contains a request for information,
the 20 working day countdown will start on the first working day after
receipt of this request.

 

The request may be subject to an exemption, which the Authority is
entitled to apply to refuse the request. We will notify you if this is the
case.

 

Once the information has been identified the Authority may also ask that a
fee be paid for processing and delivering the information to you. Details
of any fee to be charged will be notified to you as soon as possible.

 

Any future correspondence you may have in relation to this matter should
be sent to the Senior Information Governance Officer, Mid Sussex District
Council, Oaklands, Oaklands Road, Haywards Heath, West Sussex RH16 1SS, or
by return to this email.

 

Information provided under the FOI Act 2000 or the Environmental
Information Regulations 2004 may be not be re-used, except for personal
study and non-commercial research or for news reporting and reviews,
without the permission of the Council. Please see the Council website
www.midsussex.gov.uk/page.cfm?pageID=4084  for further information or
contact Service Improvement on 01444 477422.

 

Kind regards,

 

FOI/DPA Team

 

 

The information contained in this email may be subject to public
disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Unless the
information contained in this email is legally exempt from disclosure, we
cannot guarantee that we will not provide the whole or part of this email
to a third party making a request for information about the subject matter
of this email.

This email and any attachments may contain confidential information and is
intended only to be seen and used by the named addressees. If you are not
the named addressee, any use, disclosure, copying, alteration or
forwarding of this email and its attachments is unauthorised. If you have
received this email in error please notify the sender immediately by email
or by calling +44 (0) 1444 458 166 and remove this email and its
attachments from your system.

The views expressed within this email and any attachments are not
necessarily the views or policies of Mid Sussex District Council. We have
taken precautions to minimise the risk of transmitting software viruses,
but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks before accessing this
email and any attachments. Except where required by law, we shall not be
responsible for any damage, loss or liability of any kind suffered in
connection with this email and any attachments, or which may result from
reliance on the contents of this email and any attachments.

Dear Freedom of Information,

Quote:

"You are not correct in your assertion that the 2014 Regulations mean the bailiff is not entitled to any payment until the monies owed to the Council are paid in full."

Your statement above means you haven't bothered to read what I have written. If you had bothered you would have understood that I was saying that because of the way the 2014 regulations have been enacted the taxpayer is being robbed by the government because it is giving taxpayers money to enrich bailiffs firms. That is unless the council came up with a scheme whereby it could get round the regulations as it did before the 2014 regulations came into force. (Regulation 52(4) of SI 1992/613).

The matter below has not been addressed:

DIRECT PAYMENTS

Presumably pro-rata payments can not apply when the person owing the money doesn't pay the Council's Enforcement Agent, but pays instead, the Council itself. Regulation 13 of the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 can have no validity, and if the council allows its Enforcement Agent to allocate monies pro-rata it will be acting unlawfully.

Yours sincerely,

Paul Smith

Freedom of Information, Mid Sussex District Council

Thank you for your email. If the email contains a request for information,
the 20 working day countdown will start on the first working day after
receipt of this request.

 

The request may be subject to an exemption, which the Authority is
entitled to apply to refuse the request. We will notify you if this is the
case.

 

Once the information has been identified the Authority may also ask that a
fee be paid for processing and delivering the information to you. Details
of any fee to be charged will be notified to you as soon as possible.

 

Any future correspondence you may have in relation to this matter should
be sent to the Senior Information Governance Officer, Mid Sussex District
Council, Oaklands, Oaklands Road, Haywards Heath, West Sussex RH16 1SS, or
by return to this email.

 

Information provided under the FOI Act 2000 or the Environmental
Information Regulations 2004 may be not be re-used, except for personal
study and non-commercial research or for news reporting and reviews,
without the permission of the Council. Please see the Council website
www.midsussex.gov.uk/page.cfm?pageID=4084  for further information or
contact Service Improvement on 01444 477422.

 

Kind regards,

 

FOI/DPA Team

 

 

The information contained in this email may be subject to public
disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Unless the
information contained in this email is legally exempt from disclosure, we
cannot guarantee that we will not provide the whole or part of this email
to a third party making a request for information about the subject matter
of this email.

This email and any attachments may contain confidential information and is
intended only to be seen and used by the named addressees. If you are not
the named addressee, any use, disclosure, copying, alteration or
forwarding of this email and its attachments is unauthorised. If you have
received this email in error please notify the sender immediately by email
or by calling +44 (0) 1444 458 166 and remove this email and its
attachments from your system.

The views expressed within this email and any attachments are not
necessarily the views or policies of Mid Sussex District Council. We have
taken precautions to minimise the risk of transmitting software viruses,
but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks before accessing this
email and any attachments. Except where required by law, we shall not be
responsible for any damage, loss or liability of any kind suffered in
connection with this email and any attachments, or which may result from
reliance on the contents of this email and any attachments.