Thames Valley Police: Implied Right of Access - Removal

Waiting for an internal review by Thames Valley Police of their handling of this request.

Dear Thames Valley Police,

I would like to you provide me with information you store on the subject of removal of implied rights of access.

Specifically:

1) What system is in place to log when an individual removes the implied right of access for staff/agents within your authority, to visit their property.

2) How many removal's of your implied right of access did the your authority receive in the following years (feel free to supply information for financial or calendar year as you see fit, but please ensure you specify the date range supplied):
a) 2013
b) 2014
c) 2015

3) Please supply a copy of your guidance for handling removal of implied rights of access.

4) If a "tenant"/"owner" of land/property removes your authority's implied right of access to said property, in what instances are your authority permitted to visit said property?

5) What legal / lawful processes would be required before your authority can visit a property to which your implied right of access has been removed?

Yours faithfully,

Wayne Pearsall

Public Access, Thames Valley Police

Dear Mr Pearsall,

Thames Valley Police, Joint Information Management Unit acknowledge receipt of your email and will respond further in due course. Thank you for contacting Thames Valley Police.

Kind Regards,
Sierra

Sierra Gaffney | Public Access Officer
Joint Information Management Unit | Hampshire Constabulary & Thames Valley Police
Address Thames Valley Police HQ, Oxford Road, Kidlington, Oxon OX5 2NX

Information Management Helpdesk:
Hampshire        [email address] / 02380479580 (internal 4631755)
Thames Valley   [email address] / 01865 846329 (internal 700 6329)

show quoted sections

Public Access, Thames Valley Police

Dear Mr Pearsall,

Further to my acknowledgement, please can you clarify what you mean by "implied right of access" as this is not a term used by Thames Valley Police.

Also, please note that questions one, four and five are questions and not requests for recorded information. Please consider rewording them.

Your request has been put on hold pending clarification.

Kind Regards,
Sierra

Sierra Gaffney | Public Access Officer
Joint Information Management Unit | Hampshire Constabulary & Thames Valley Police
Address Thames Valley Police HQ, Oxford Road, Kidlington, Oxon OX5 2NX

Information Management Helpdesk:
Hampshire        [email address] / 02380479580 (internal 4631755)
Thames Valley   [email address] / 01865 846329 (internal 700 6329)

show quoted sections

Dear Public Access,

Further to my request for information, you have came back with two very strange statements.

Firstly, you do not know what "implied right of access" means? I find this odd. The duty of the police is to uphold common law - not simply legislation. As I am sure you are aware- something which is illegal could well be lawful, and something that is legal could well be unlawful (this has been proved time and time again in court).

The UK is a common law jurisdiction, which is law's set by caselaw handed down in court.

Under Common Law, a wo/man has an implied right to enter a property / knock a door - unless told otherwise (IE: sign saying "Private Property - Keep Out" ETC.). If somebody visits a property, and is told to leave, they are committing trespass. An offence under common law. Tort: Trespass to Land. Somebody can be told not to visit a piece of land/property before actually visiting... and thus, can on their first visit commit trespass by the very nature of entering the property. An implied right of access applies for various reasons: Postman, Deliveries, Meter readings, and so forth.

I do find it difficult to comprehend that those that are meant to uphold the law (both common law, and legislation) do not understand the law. I do note that TV Licensing (The BBC) whilst having a "Crime Detection" function, do have a system in place to handle 'Removal of Implied right of access' (See: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-d7nOnqT7DlU/Te... )

Hopefully, you are more clear on the meaning of implied right of access - if not, then I do suggest talking to an officer of the law, who should understand the meaning, or perhaps seeking independent legal advice.

You go onto state that Questions 1, 4 and 5 are questions and not request's for information. However, you might be aware of the ICO guidelines on handling FOI requests: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/gui...
----------
"Can a question be a valid request?"
"Yes, a question can be a valid request for information. It is important to be aware of this so that you can identify requests and send them promptly to the correct person.
Example:
“Please send me all the information you have about the application for a 24-hour licence at the Midnite Bar.”
“Re. Midnite Bar licence application. Please explain, why have you decided to approve this application?”
Both are valid requests for information about the reasons for the decision.
Under the Act, if you have information in your records that answers the question you should provide it in response to the request."
--------

However, if it makes it simpler, I shall rephrase my request -

1) What system is in place to log when an individual removes the
implied right of access for staff/agents within your authority, to
visit their property.

-- Please provide the stored information relating to the database, or other which is used to note when a wo/man has removed your authorities right to access their property without invitation (AKA: Removed an implied right under common law - which would mean your authority would therefore be committing trespass - which could well be a criminal matter).

4) If a "tenant"/"owner" of land/property removes your authority's
implied right of access to said property, in what instances are
your authority permitted to visit said property?

5) What legal / lawful processes would be required before your
authority can visit a property to which your implied right of
access has been removed?

---- Please provide stored information which would outline what processes would need to be followed to visit a property, without being deemed a trespasser, or infact being deemed to harass the tenant/land owner. I am aware that under common law, if a 'warrant' has been issued, then the court has given authority for access to the front door to make *peaceful* representations - however, said SIGNED warrant must also be produced at the time of the visit under common law. In what other instances do your authority have 'authority' to visit. The information sought may well be in the form of briefing notes, guidance, policy documents, and training records. I do note that another prime example of when you would be entitled to enter might be to 'preserve life' (acting in a manner which is considered reasonable by an ordinary wo/man)

Yours sincerely,

Wayne Pearsall

Janik2 left an annotation ()

Interesting. One learns something new almost every day.

Public Access, Thames Valley Police

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Pearsall,

Please see the attached response regarding your recent FOI request.

Kind Regards,
Sierra

Sierra Gaffney | Public Access Officer
Joint Information Management Unit | Hampshire Constabulary & Thames Valley Police
Address Thames Valley Police HQ, Oxford Road, Kidlington, Oxon OX5 2NX

Information Management Helpdesk:
Hampshire        [email address] / 02380479580 (internal 4631755)
Thames Valley   [email address] / 01865 846329 (internal 700 6329)

show quoted sections

Dear Thames Valley Police,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Thames Valley Police's handling of my FOI request 'Thames Valley Police: Implied Right of Access - Removal'.

374/16

As I have already explained... Every question asked was a valid foi request.

Please answer all questions posted in accordance with the act.

Confirm or deny. Do you hold information relating to my query.

You stated that it would be a civil matter... This is not entirely true. Trespass after implied access rights are removed could amount to harassment which is a criminal matter... So perhaps your authority need to review policies on this matter...

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,

Wayne Pearsall

Wayne Pearsall left an annotation ()

Confirmation of right to remove implied right of access in response....
"Removal of “Implied Rights of Access” would lead to offences of Trespass. This would be considered a civil matter for the landowner or relevant occupier and Thames Valley Police would not pursue a criminal investigation. As such, there is no guidance or policy held."

Public Access, Thames Valley Police

Dear Mr Pearsall,

I acknowledge receipt of your email requesting an internal review on the response to your original request HQ/PA/000374/16.

The Internal Review will now be considered by the Senior Public Access Manager and he will respond further to you within 20 working days.

Regards

Sierra Gaffney | Public Access Officer
Joint Information Management Unit | Hampshire Constabulary & Thames Valley Police
Address Thames Valley Police HQ, Oxford Road, Kidlington, Oxon OX5 2NX

Information Management Helpdesk:
Hampshire        [email address] / 02380479580 (internal 4631755)
Thames Valley   [email address] / 01865 846329 (internal 700 6329)

show quoted sections

Public Access, Thames Valley Police

Ms Pearsall

 

I refer to your email below and apologise for the delay in responding. 
  I am struggling to clearly identify what information it is that you
require and as a result, I would be most grateful if you can telephone me
to discuss so that I can ensure that a comprehensive review is
undertaken.   As such, this is a request for clarification.

 

Many thanks in advance.

 

Jason Russell

Senior Public Access Manager

01865 846329

 

 

 

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

 

From:    Wayne Pearsall [[FOI #313485 email]]

Sent:     05 February 2016 02:45

To:          FOI

Subject:               HQ/PA/000449/16

 

     Dear Thames Valley Police,

    

     Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of

     Information reviews.

    

     I am writing to request an internal review of Thames Valley

     Police's handling of my FOI request 'Thames Valley Police: Implied

     Right of Access - Removal'.

    

     374/16

    

     As I have already explained... Every question asked was a valid foi

     request.

    

     Please answer all questions posted in accordance with the act.

    

     Confirm or deny. Do you hold information relating to my query.

    

     You stated that it would be a civil matter... This is not entirely

     true. Trespass after implied access rights are removed could amount

     to harassment which is a criminal matter... So perhaps your

     authority need to review policies on this matter...

    

     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,

    

     Wayne Pearsall

    

     

     

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

     Please use this email address for all replies to this request:

     [FOI #313485 email]

show quoted sections

Dear Public Access,

Jason. My request is very clear. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/t...

If you would like a specific clarification them please ask in writing. I prefer to keep traceable written communication.

However, as you must certainly be aware, this matter is not an entirely civil matter given the crime of 'criminal trespass' existing in UK law.

Yours sincerely,

Wayne Pearsall

Thames Valley Police

Mr Pearsall

I am currently obtaining information from our solicitor in order for me to clarify certain points. I do not have any personal knowledge of the issues raised in your request.

My reason for asking for clariication was to find out some more detail on why you are asking for this information as it appears to be an issue that you have experienced or are concerned about. I was hoping our conversation would help me to help you in confirming whether we hold any information which falls within the scope of your request.

If you wish to outline the rationale behind your request and you believe this would help with my understanding of what it is you are requesting then please do so.

If not, I will respond to your appeal in due course based on the information I have available.

Jason Russell | Senior Manager for Public Access
Joint Information Management Unit | Hampshire Constabulary & Thames Valley Police
Telephone 02380479580 | Internal 4631754
Address Hampshire Constabulary, Mottisfont Court, Tower Street, Winchester, Hampshire, SO23 8ND

Information Management Helpdesk:
Hampshire: [email address] / 02380479580 (internal 4631757)
Thames Valley: [email address] / 01865 846329 (internal 700 6329)

show quoted sections

Dear Thames Valley Police,

I will clarify for you that it has came to my attention that many forces in the UK are unlawfully assisting debt collectors and enforcement agents in civil matters. The police are acting outside their oath of office.

My request was to see how your force handles and logs lawful notices made by lawful land occupiers. It appears clear that your force have no regards to lawful notices served.

I have personally had a police force attend my property to ' give words of advice ' on the request of a business (the home office) despite said force being aware that any implied right of access was removed and said business making the request actually stating that no criminal offence had been committed on the actual request.

As you will be aware this said force is not your own force but your force neighbours my area.

Obviously, the FOIa is clear that personal details cannot be requested (s.40), and my request was clearly for the information your force stores.

I obviously find it concerning that TV licensing can disclose the same information I have requested from your department, but a business who's function is to uphold the law cannot?

Furthermore, when more and more policing functions are going to privatisation, it makes one wonder what civil liberties we will have left in the very near future...

Yours faithfully,

Wayne Pearsall

Isa Bell, London UK left an annotation ()

Which TVP solicitor ?

Christine Alexander, a solicitor since 03/02/92
Shilpa Dhillon, a solicitor since 02/02/15
Sean Patrick Hazell, a solicitor since 15/02/89
Lindsay Jopling, a solicitor since 17/06/13
Lisa Perkins, a solicitor since 15/08/14
Graham Michael Wood, a solicitor since15/12/81

Wayne Pearsall left an annotation ()

Well come on. You know you're onto something when they need to consult legal advice ;)

Thames Valley Police

Mr Pearsall

This is most helpful. Thank you.

As outlined in my previous email, I will respond to your FOI appeal in due course.

Jason

Jason Russell | Senior Manager for Public Access
Joint Information Management Unit | Hampshire Constabulary & Thames Valley Police
Telephone 02380479580 | Internal 4631754
Address Hampshire Constabulary, Mottisfont Court, Tower Street, Winchester, Hampshire, SO23 8ND

Information Management Helpdesk:
Hampshire: [email address] / 02380479580 (internal 4631757)
Thames Valley: [email address] / 01865 846329 (internal 700 6329)

show quoted sections

Public Access, Thames Valley Police

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Pearsall

 

I refer to your email dated 5^th February 2016 requesting a review of our
previous response to your Freedom of Information (FOI) request.   Our
considered response is attached.

 

Yours sincerely

 

(Sent on behalf of)

Jason Russell | Snr Public Access Manager

Joint Information Management Unit | Hampshire Constabulary & Thames Valley
Police

Telephone +44(0)1865 846 329 | Address Thames Valley Police Headquarters,
Oxford Road, Kidlington, Oxfordshire, OX5 2NX

 

 

show quoted sections

Dear Public Access,

Jason. New area of law? This is common law. Centuries old...

Can I remind you of s.26 of the criminal justice and courts act 2015.

If police assist in civil matters they are liable to prosecution... Yet you can refer to newspapers/pnc in your own area for multiple instances of your own force assisting in civil matters.

I believe your legal advice may be a little unwise to say that there isn't any guidance... As you're legal advice had provided guidance now then you do gold said information...

Yours sincerely,

Wayne Pearsall

Tian left an annotation ()

Question from a follower of this thread; to quote your statement "I do note that another prime example of when you would be entitled to enter might be to 'preserve life' (acting in a manner which is considered reasonable by an ordinary wo/man)", please kindly elaborate on this subject, which I believe is s17 of PACE Act.

Wayne Pearsall left an annotation ()

As said, any breach of law has a defence of acting reasonable in the circumstances... Ie, a rolling car... You open the door and pull the parking brake... You've trespassed... But can you be punished as your actions prevented injury...

Wayne Pearsall left an annotation ()

... What if the door is locked... The cars getting faster... Smash the window... How about now.... Still reasonable? - It'd of hot a brick wall... But if in front of the wall was a buggy... (clearer?)

Tian left an annotation ()

Thanks for your response, do you know please if there exists any guidelines ,or policies and procedures, that Thames valley Police would follow in event of forced entry and search of premises, under s17 PACE? If, for example a member of the public called police to request welfare check of an individual they hadn't seen for 3 weeks, would that justify (unreasonable) forced entry and search of premises, or could this be trespass? How are these calls authenticated?
Many thanks in advance.

Wayne Pearsall left an annotation ()

Make a request to TVP. I'm not sure, I would request, however, they'd label me as vexatious if I make too many requests.

Wayne Pearsall left an annotation ()

However, in sure there's many alternatives to forced entry... Looking through windows, letterboxes. And in such circumstances I'm sure they'd call a locksmith to avoid damaging the property...

Isa Bell, London UK left an annotation ()

Wayne,

It is my understanding that the provision, in England, of so-called "legal advice" is unlawful unless the provider is a regulated legal professional - solicitor or barrister.

Isa Bell, London UK left an annotation ()

Re: Watching recorded telly without a license (from an above posting)

Wonder if this so called UK legislation would apply to a person within England watching recordings of a foreigner broadcaster.

For example, if a person whilst in England watched a recording of Dutch TV, German TV (ZDF, ARD, WDR3 etc.), French TV etc. would the police and CPS (or whoever is the prosecution authority) really have legal grounds for punishing someone for NOT watching BBC's dumbed-down perpetual crap (a.k.a. brain rot/junk vision) but instead watching superior European television programmes (recorded or from satellites).

Additionally if the person, the watcher of telly including the BBC crap, was not resident in the jurisdiction, would the private company enforcing the telly license for the BBC attempt to report them for prosecution ?

Isa Bell, London UK left an annotation ()

TVP's top management lack organisational ability both tactical and strategic. Consequently the running of the force is often confused, messy and a failure.

Concerns persons should enquire whether the joint TVP & Hants FOI service staff have access to the secretive Niche and other databases when they pronounce that someone is using an allegedly fake name.

Are the personal details of those who dare to ask TVP FOI questions added to the police's Niche and/or other databases?

Whilst accepting the FOI staff are de facto clerks processing the paperwork, the hidden and always unnamed individuals determining the FOI responses are deliberately absent - transparent the process certainly isn't.

Wayne Pearsall left an annotation ()

Isa, I'm not sure what you are referring to Re legal advice?

However, the viewing of LIVE Broadcasts (whilst in the UK) requires a TV licence. This applies to any broadcast irrespective of where it originates.

In Ireland, similar applies: having a device capable of receiving a broadcast (as was the previous standing of UK legislation).

Not withstanding to other similar legislation in various countries, you cannot be prosecuted by the UK for watching the BBC if in Ireland (but if you didnt have an Irish TV licence then their prosecution body could).

FYI a TV licence in the UK is only needed if watching live TV. Not for catchup etc. But it doesn't matter what nationality the person is if in the UK.

The prosecution body is the BBC under the trading name of TV licensing. TV licensing is outsourced to capita.

Tian left an annotation ()

Thanks Wayne, I appreciate your response to my posts and your advice to request from TVP the info I seek. I am finding it difficult to ascertain exactly what information I am entitled to request from TVP under FOI Act (without being accused of being vexatious of course), and what info I can obtain via Subject Access Request (in accordance with Data Protection Act).

I am grateful for your response to my scenario -
"However, i'm sure there's many alternatives to forced entry... Looking through windows, letterboxes. And in such circumstances I'm sure they'd call a locksmith to avoid damaging the property..."
Although don't be so sure, I have learnt that certainly DO NOT go on holiday without informing whoever needs to know, the removal of their implied right to access! :-(
pls see related topic on http://charitybags.org.uk/forced_entry_f...

Looking for an EU Authority?

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

AskTheEU.org