Tender process re pay by phone parking system

Mrs Brown made this Freedom of Information request to Westminster City Council

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 refused by Westminster City Council.

Dear Sir or Madam,

I would like to know about the tender process that Westminster City Council must have undertaken at the time of considering the implementation of a pay by phone parking system, in accordance to the European Directive 2004/18/EC, for which the details are available here http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexU...

Firstly, can you please provide the details of each supplier, a part from Verrus UK Limited, which the Council might have considered at the time. Can you please advise the specific date(s) when the Council might have met with each supplier to discuss their services, including Verrus UK Limited. Also, can you please provide the details of each individual that the Council might have met from each organisation.

Secondly, I would like to know what made the Council select Verrus UK Limited in preference to any other supplier, who might also have presented their product and services.

Thank you.

Yours faithfully,

Mrs Brown

Westminster City Council

Confirmation of Freedom Of Information Request

Thank you for your request for information.

Your request details have now been recorded and will be passed on to the
appropriate Divisional Records Officer for action.

This Freedom Of Information Request was based on the following
information:

Name: Mrs Brown
Address: See email address
Email: [FOI #18217 email]
Telephone:
Request Details: Dear Sir or Madam,

I would like to know about the tender process that Westminster City
Council must have undertaken at the time of considering the
implementation of a pay by phone parking system, in accordance to
the European Directive 2004/18/EC, for which the details are
available here
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexU...

Firstly, can you please provide the details of each supplier, a
part from Verrus UK Limited, which the Council might have
considered at the time. Can you please advise the specific date(s)
when the Council might have met with each supplier to discuss their
services, including Verrus UK Limited. Also, can you please provide
the details of each individual that the Council might have met from
each organisation.

Secondly, I would like to know what made the Council select Verrus
UK Limited in preference to any other supplier, who might also have
presented their product and services.

FOI Reference Number: 4385
Target Completion Date: 19/10/2009

Please do not reply to this email.
This is an automatic response to your request, and replies to this message
will not be actioned.

If you need to contact Westminster City Council regarding your request,
please contact:

mailto:[Westminster City Council request email]
Tel:020 7641 3921

show quoted sections

Coutinho, Seonaid, Westminster City Council

2 Attachments

Dear Ms Brown,

please find attached response to your request for information.

<<FOI4385 Brown SC.doc>> <<PbP Parking Tender Evaluation Award
Procedure.doc>>
Regards

Customer Relations
WCC Parking Services

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Deas,

Thank you for your response to my FOI request.

I need further clarification with regards to your response and the tendering process for the introduction of the pay by phone parking system.

My questions are as follows:-

1. On the top left corner of your response, it says "DRAFT COPY". Why is this? Was your response not final?

2. You seem to have mentioned Vertex Data Science Ltd as an organisation that submitted tender. I have googled the name of this organisation and, unless I am mistaken, they don't seem to be a pay by phone parking provider. Here is the link to their website http://www.nccmembership.co.uk/pooled/ar... and I would be grateful if you could explain the reason(s) why the Council contacted this particular organisation as a potential supplier for the pay by phone parking technology.

3. I would like to fully understand the process that the Council went through to introduce the pay by phone parking system. Please can you describe the different stages and phases that the Council went through from beginning to end to discuss, implement, advertise etc the existing pay by phone parking system. In your response, please include a description of how and when the idea was first generated and discussed, how the council contacted and selected relevant organisations that presented their products and services, details of the trial conducted with the use of the Verrus technology in two zones of the borough (I believe in 2007) and any tendering process undertaken at that time, details of the results of the trial together with details of how a decision had been made to award a trial contract to Verrus and not to another organisation, details of any tendering process before hiring Verrus for the trial AND before awarding the contract to Verrus again for the present pay by phone parking scheme.

4. Please advise the exact time and phase/stage of the pay by phone parking implementation project during which the six organisations mentioned in your response had submitted tenders.

5. Please can you supply copies of the tendering documentation prepared and submitted by each of the six organisations mentioned in your response.

6. Please can you supply copies of all correspondence (whether received or sent out) with each of the six organisations mentioned in your response.

7. Please can you supply copies of the minutes of all the meetings the council had with each of the six organisations mentioned in your response.

8. Please can you supply copies of the minutes of the meeting during which it was decided to use the Verrus technology for the trial scheme (for the 2 zones selected) and to award the present contract to Verrus.

9. Finally, I note that you have not answered my initial second question "what made the Council select Verrus UK Ltd in preference to any other supplier who might have also presented their products and services". Your response only refers to a set of general procedures to follow to select suppliers but I have no proof that the Council actually followed these procedures and I am totally unclear on the basis upon which Councillor Danny Chalkley selected Verrus among the other suppliers. I would like to be notified of the specific reason(s) why Verrus was selected for BOTH the trial scheme and the present scheme. In your response, please include detailed facts such as, for example, price/fee comparisons between Verrus and all other suppliers the council considered, qualitative comparisons between Verrus and all other suppliers considered etc, for BOTH the trial scheme and the present scheme.

Yours sincerely,

Mrs Brown

Customer Relations, Westminster City Council

Dear Mrs Brown,

Thank you for your e-mail dated 7 October 2008.

The response was completed for me by my colleague Seonaid. However, as one of the Departmental Records Officers for Parking Services, my name is contained on the response. I apologise that the words 'Draft Copy' are included in your response, this is regrettably the result of an administrative error.

In view of your recent correspondence, I'll ensure that a new FOI request is logged for you and an automatic notification will be sent to you shortly.

A full response will be sent to you within the 20 working day time frame as specified by the FOI Act 2000.

Your sincerely

Gordon Deas

show quoted sections

Westminster City Council

Confirmation of Freedom Of Information Request

Thank you for your request for information.

Your request details have now been recorded and will be passed on to the
appropriate Divisional Records Officer for action.

This Freedom Of Information Request was based on the following
information:

Name: Mrs Brown
Address: See E-mail address.
Email: [FOI #18217 email]
Telephone:
Request Details: In relation to Freedom of Information request 4385

I need further clarification with regards to your response and the
tendering process for the introduction of the pay by phone parking system.

My questions are as follows:-

1. You seem to have mentioned Vertex Data Science Ltd as an
organisation that submitted tender. I have googled the name of this
organisation and, unless I am mistaken, they don't seem to be a pay
by phone parking provider. Here is the link to their website
http://www.nccmembership.co.uk/pooled/ar...
and I would be grateful if you could explain the reason(s) why the
Council contacted this particular organisation as a potential
supplier for the pay by phone parking technology.

2. I would like to fully understand the process that the Council
went through to introduce the pay by phone parking system. Please
can you describe the different stages and phases that the Council
went through from beginning to end to discuss, implement, advertise
etc the existing pay by phone parking system. In your response,
please include a description of how and when the idea was first
generated and discussed, how the council contacted and selected
relevant organisations that presented their products and services,
details of the trial conducted with the use of the Verrus
technology in two zones of the borough (I believe in 2007) and any
tendering process undertaken at that time, details of the results
of the trial together with details of how a decision had been made
to award a trial contract to Verrus and not to another
organisation, details of any tendering process before hiring Verrus
for the trial AND before awarding the contract to Verrus again for
the present pay by phone parking scheme.

3. Please advise the exact time and phase/stage of the pay by phone
parking implementation project during which the six organisations
mentioned in your response had submitted tenders.

4. Please can you supply copies of the tendering documentation
prepared and submitted by each of the six organisations mentioned
in your response.

5. Please can you supply copies of all correspondence (whether
received or sent out) with each of the six organisations mentioned
in your response.

6. Please can you supply copies of the minutes of all the meetings
the council had with each of the six organisations mentioned in
your response.

7. Please can you supply copies of the minutes of the meeting
during which it was decided to use the Verrus technology for the
trial scheme (for the 2 zones selected) and to award the present
contract to Verrus.

8. Finally, I note that you have not answered my initial second
question "what made the Council select Verrus UK Ltd in preference
to any other supplier who might have also presented their products
and services". Your response only refers to a set of general
procedures to follow to select suppliers but I have no proof that
the Council actually followed these procedures and I am totally
unclear on the basis upon which Councillor Danny Chalkley selected
Verrus among the other suppliers. I would like to be notified of
the specific reason(s) why Verrus was selected for BOTH the trial
scheme and the present scheme. In your response, please include
detailed facts such as, for example, price/fee comparisons between
Verrus and all other suppliers the council considered, qualitative
comparisons between Verrus and all other suppliers considered etc,
for BOTH the trial scheme and the present scheme.

FOI Reference Number: 4474
Target Completion Date: 05/11/2009

Please do not reply to this email.
This is an automatic response to your request, and replies to this message
will not be actioned.

If you need to contact Westminster City Council regarding your request,
please contact:

mailto:[Westminster City Council request email]
Tel:020 7641 3921

show quoted sections

FOI, Westminster City Council

1 Attachment

Dear Mrs Brown,

Please find attached our response to your recent requests submitted under
the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

<<Aggregated Fees Letter - Mrs Brown FOI 4453 4455 4456 4474 4526.doc>>

Yours sincerely,

Tanya Holden
Data Protection & FOI Officer
Knowledge and Information Management
Westminster City Council
101 Orchardson Street
London, NW8 8EA
Tel: 0207 641 6451
Fax: 0207 641 2872
Email: [Westminster City Council request email]
[1]www.westminster.gov.uk

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. file://www.westminster.gov.uk

Dear Ms Holden,

Thank you for your response.

I am very sorry but I do not accept your explanation for not processing my FOI requests.

The FOI requests you are referring to in your response are as follows:-

FOI 4455 - Security Devices for motorcycles
FOI 4453 - Parking cards usage
FOI 4456 - Verrus parking pay by phone uptime
FOI 4474 - Tender process re pay by phone system
FOI 4526 - Dialogue with major motorcycle groups

As you must be very well aware, the FOI Act 2000, section 5 (2) allows a public authority to aggregate the cost of providing the information requested through multiple FOIs submitted by the same person, as long as the FOIs in question "relate, to any extent, to the same or similar information".

I am very sorry to say that I can't see how the above FOIs relate to the same or similar information.

FOI 4455 is about security devices for motorcycles, please let me know which one of the other 4 FOIs relate to security devices for motorcycles.

FOI 4453 is about parking cards, please let me know which one of the other 4 FOIs relate to parking cards.

FOI 4456 is about the Verrus pay by phone system uptime that is mentioned in the latest motorcycle report. Mr Fitsall seems to quote a number in his report and all I am asking for is supporting documentation for the data quoted by Mr Fitsall. How is this related to any of my other FOIs?

FOI 4474 is about the tender process re the Verrus pay by phone system. How has this to do with parking cards, system uptime, security devices and dialogue with motorcycle groups (see below)?

FOI 4526 is about the dialogue that the City Council has been having with major motorcycle groups, as stated in Mr Fitsall's latest motorcycle report. Has this got anything to do with security devices, Verrus and parking cards?

I consider your response as quite vexatious to be honest, as it is unacceptable to incorrectly use the regulations set out within the FOI Act 2000 in an attempt to try and avoid answering requests from the public.

Therefore, would you please answer each of my FOI requests as, I repeat, they do not relate to the same or similar information, as defined in section 5 (2) of the FOI Act 2000.

If you continue to refuse to reply to my FOI requests, I may raise an official complaint to the Information Commissioner AND District Auditor for what, I believe, is a mis-use of the FOI Act 2000 on your part, in an attempt to avoid answering FOI requests and failing to make information available to members of the public that they are entirely entitled to see.

Yours sincerely,

Mrs Brown

Dear Tanya,

Following my note of yesterday, I would also like to add that I have not submitted 10 requests in the last 60 days. I have submitted less than that, so please get your facts right before coming up with false excuses to avoid answering FOIs and reduce your workload.

This is another thing I will mention to the ICO and District Auditor should you continue to refuse to answer my FOI requests.

Yours faithfully,

Mrs Brown

Dear Sir or Madam,

Please would you reply to my emails dated 29th and 30th October 2009 with regards to the above FOI.

It is not appropriate to aggregate my FOIs as they are not related, and also I have NOT submitted 10 requests in the last 60 days, so please reply at your earliest convenience.

Yours faithfully,

Mrs Brown

Ben Harris left an annotation ()

The Council's internal review response for this request (and nine others) is at <http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/di...>.