Dear West Midlands Casulty Reduction Scheme (WMCRS),
There is confusion amongst the public regarding the police use of cameras and ANPR to record speeding offences when the cameras seem to do nothing to punish really dangerous drivers using false number plates or driving stolen vehicles, and the police liveried mobile camera vans appear to employ police civilians rather than actual police officers.
From your website https://www.wmsafetycameras.co.uk/ it states, quote, "In 2002 the Department of Transport gave the seven Local Authorities in the West Midlands region the go ahead to join up with the Magistrates Court, Highways Agency and West Midlands Police to form the Casualty Reduction Partnership(WMCRP)".

FOI Q1.When and why was the WMCRP renamed the WMCRS, is the WMCRS based in Lloyd House, and if not where is it based, how is WMCRS funded and what is their current budget, and is the extensive nature of partnership organisations, as currently described on the website, still true, and who are the key personnel who meet together as stakeholder representatives of the scheme?

FOI Q2.How many employees are currently employed by the WMCRS, including agency and subcontractors, and what are their job descriptions and corresponding gender if known, to establish the male/female ratio for responsibility?

FOI Q3.Who is the most senior civilian in the WMCRS and who is the senior police officer delegated to the scheme or who is reported to on a regular basis?

FOI Q4.What is the reporting chain of responsibility between the WMCRS manager and the Chief Constable, does the WMCRS keep seperate financial accounts and where are the accounts published as they do not seem to appear in the police accounts, and can you provide a link or access advice?

FOI Q5.What role does the WMCRS have in the running of the fixed average speed cameras, is it WMCRS or the CTO that has a business relationship with TTS (who sell the speed awareness courses) and how much does TTS pay the police or WMCRS for each referral?

FOI Q6.What are the recorded KSI accident figures for the West Midlands for the past 5 years ( y/e April 6th) and, bearing in mind the Average Speed Cameras (ASC)were only introduced by David Jamieson in July 2016, for the same periods what are the recorded camera offences passed onto the CTO broken down by way of ASC and mobiles recorded?For the same periods how many recorded activation offences were not passed onto the CTO and the reasons for them being cancelled or invalid?

FOI Q7. I note that 4 new ASC are operating in the WM area from March 2019. https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/black-c... .
Councillor Steve Evans, cabinet member at Wolverhampton Council, said local councils and police forces do not profit from the fines generated by the cameras - instead it goes to the government. Any extra profit will be put into "road safety initiatives" including the operating costs associated with maintaining the equipment.
Please advise what role WMCRS had in planning and funding the 4 new ASC, what was the supporting accident data to justify the cameras, who was the most senior person who authorised the implementation, and if the fines apparently all go to government please explain how `extra profit`can go into `road safety initiatives`including running the scheme? Is there a business plan whereby the 4 camera scheme receives automatic funding and, if so, how much is the funding, where is it sourced and how is it processed?

Thanking you in anticipation of clarifying the operation of this important safety organisation.

Yours faithfully,
Dennis Fallon (BScHons)

Freedom of Information,

Please accept this as an acknowledgement of receipt of your e-mail by the
Freedom of Information Unit.
 
If your email is a valid request for information under the Freedom of
Information Act, your request will be dealt with within the legislative
deadline of 20 working days.  Should we be unable to meet this deadline
for any reason you will be notified as soon as possible.
 
Please note that if your email is a request is for your own personal data
you should make a subject access request to the Data Protection Unit.  You
can do this by completing a WA162 form, which is available on the West
Midlands Police website.  Search the West Midlands Police website for
'Subject Access' or go directly to this page:
[1]https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/abou...
 
If you require further information please contact 101 and ask for the
Freedom of Information Unit.
 
You might find what you are looking for on our website:
[2]http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/
 
If you have information about any crime, you can contact us on the
non-emergency number: 101.
 
In an emergency, for example where life is in danger or a crime in
progress, call 999.

This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged
or confidential information. If received in error, please notify the
originator immediately. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or
alteration of this email is strictly forbidden. Views or opinions
expressed in this email do not necessarily represent those of West
Midlands Police. All West Midlands Police email activity is monitored for
virus, racist, obscene, or otherwise inappropriate activity. No
responsibility is accepted by West Midlands Police for any loss or damage
arising in any way from the receipt or use of this email.

References

Visible links
1. https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/abou...
2. http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/

Dear West Midlands Casulty Reduction Scheme,
Just for the record, this is copy of the stated aims and partnership links of the Scheme displayed August 2019, quote "Our Aims. The aims of the West Midlands Police Camera Enforcement Unit as developed for the original Operational Case are: Through a combination of Enforcement, Engineering and Education, reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured in road collisions in the West Midlands. Develop a media strategy, which will raise public awareness of the location of fixed and mobile safety camera sites. To influence drivers' attitude away from inappropriate speed.

The department works towards the mission statement of:
"To promote safety for all road users in the West Midlands Metropolitan Area and support the delivery of the West Midlands targets for the reduction in the number and severity of road traffic accident casualties."
To achieve this we work to implement road safety measures through education, engineering and enforcement. In order to ensure the most appropriate solution is implemented, we work closely with our partners at West Midlands Police-CMPG, Highways England, Her Majesty's Courts Service, West Midlands Fire Service and the seven local authorities of the West Midlands (representing Birmingham, Coventry, Dudley, Sandwell, Solihull, Walsall and Wolverhampton) to identify road safety issues, determine an appropriate solution and, where appropriate, conduct enforcement through safety cameras and police enforcement.

Yours faithfully,

Dennis Fallon (BScHons)

Freedom of Information,

5 Attachments

Dear Mr Fallon

 

FOI Request Reference: 14178/19

 

Thank you for your request for information, received 16/08/2019

 

REQUEST

 

Dear West Midlands Casualty Reduction Scheme, Just for the record, this is
copy of the stated aims and partnership links of the Scheme displayed
August 2019, quote "Our Aims. The aims of the West Midlands Police Camera
Enforcement Unit as developed for the original Operational Case are:
Through a combination of Enforcement, Engineering and Education, reduce
the number of people killed or seriously injured in road collisions in the
West Midlands. Develop a media strategy, which will raise public awareness
of the location of fixed and mobile safety camera sites. To influence
drivers' attitude away from inappropriate speed.

 

The department works towards the mission statement of:

"To promote safety for all road users in the West Midlands Metropolitan
Area and support the delivery of the West Midlands targets for the
reduction in the number and severity of road traffic accident casualties."

To achieve this we work to implement road safety measures through
education, engineering and enforcement. In order to ensure the most
appropriate solution is implemented, we work closely with our partners at
West Midlands Police-CMPG, Highways England, Her Majesty's Courts Service,
West Midlands Fire Service and the seven local authorities of the West
Midlands (representing Birmingham, Coventry, Dudley, Sandwell, Solihull,
Walsall and Wolverhampton) to identify road safety issues, determine an
appropriate solution and, where appropriate, conduct enforcement through
safety cameras and police enforcement.

 

Dear West Midlands Casualty Reduction Scheme (WMCRS), There is confusion
amongst the public regarding the police use of cameras and ANPR to record
speeding offences when the cameras seem to do nothing to punish really
dangerous drivers using false number plates or driving stolen vehicles,
and the police liveried mobile camera vans appear to employ police
civilians rather than actual police officers.

From your website [1]https://www.wmsafetycameras.co.uk/ it states, quote,
"In 2002 the Department of Transport gave the seven Local Authorities in
the West Midlands region the go ahead to join up with the Magistrates
Court, Highways Agency and West Midlands Police to form the Casualty
Reduction Partnership (WMCRP)".

 

FOI Q1.When and why was the WMCRP renamed the WMCRS, is the WMCRS based in
Lloyd House, and if not where is it based, how is WMCRS funded and what is
their current budget, and is the extensive nature of partnership
organisations, as currently described on the website, still true, and who
are the key personnel who meet together as stakeholder representatives of
the scheme?

 

FOI Q2.How many employees are currently employed by the WMCRS, including
agency and subcontractors, and what are their job descriptions and
corresponding gender if known, to establish the male/female ratio for
responsibility?

 

FOI Q3.Who is the most senior civilian in the WMCRS and who is the senior
police officer delegated to the scheme or who is reported to on a regular
basis?

 

FOI Q4.What is the reporting chain of responsibility between the WMCRS
manager and the Chief Constable, does the WMCRS keep separate financial
accounts and where are the accounts published as they do not seem to
appear in the police accounts, and can you provide a link or access
advice?

 

FOI Q5.What role does the WMCRS have in the running of the fixed average
speed cameras, is it WMCRS or the CTO that has a business relationship
with TTS (who sell the speed awareness courses) and how much does TTS pay
the police or WMCRS for each referral?

 

FOI Q6.What are the recorded KSI accident figures for the West Midlands
for the past 5 years ( y/e April 6th) and, bearing in mind the Average
Speed Cameras (ASC)were only introduced by David Jamieson in July 2016,
for the same periods what are the recorded camera offences passed onto the
CTO broken down by way of ASC and mobiles recorded? For the same periods
how many recorded activation offences were not passed onto the CTO and the
reasons for them being cancelled or invalid?

 

FOI Q7. I note that 4 new ASC are operating in the WM area from March
2019.
[2]https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/black-c...
.

Councillor Steve Evans, cabinet member at Wolverhampton Council, said
local councils and police forces do not profit from the fines generated by
the cameras - instead it goes to the government. Any extra profit will be
put into "road safety initiatives" including the operating costs
associated with maintaining the equipment.

Please advise what role WMCRS had in planning and funding the 4 new ASC,
what was the supporting accident data to justify the cameras, who was the
most senior person who authorised the implementation, and if the fines
apparently all go to government please explain how `extra profit` can go
into `road safety initiatives` including running the scheme? Is there a
business plan whereby the 4 camera scheme receives automatic funding and,
if so, how much is the funding, where is it sourced and how is it
processed?

 

RESPONSE

 

Our data are not organised in such a way as to allow us to provide this
information within the appropriate (cost) limit within the Freedom of
Information (FOI) Act (see ‘Reason for Decision’ below).This information
is not centrally held in a retrievable format in respect of Question 6 -
In respect of the recorded camera offences passed onto the CTO, whether it
was an ASC, mobile and how many recorded activation offences were not
passed onto the CTO and the reasons for them being cancelled / invalid.
Would exceed the cost threshold under the Freedom of Information as we
would need to locate and retrieve each offence manually to determine the
camera and reason for cancellation.

 

The cost of compliance with the whole of your request is above the amount
to which we are legally required to respond, i.e. the cost of locating and
retrieving the information would exceed the appropriate costs limit under
section 12(1) of the FOI Act 2000. For West Midlands Police, the
appropriate limit is set at £450, as prescribed by the Freedom of
Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations
2004, S.I. 3244.

 

Therefore the cost of providing you with the information is above the
amount to which we are legally required to respond i.e. the cost of
locating and retrieving the information exceeds the ‘appropriate level’ as
stated in the Freedom of Information (Fees and Appropriate Limit)
Regulations 2004.

 

In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000, this letter acts
as a Refusal Notice for this part of the request and if one part of a
request exceeds the fees limit then S12 of the Act applies to the whole
request

 

However, In accordance with Section 16 of the Act I have a duty to provide
advice and assistance in relation to your request and can provide a
response in relation to all of your request with the exemption of Question
6 as this was retrieved during our initial research. This should not be
taken as a precedent that additional information would be supplied outside
of the time/fees legislation for any subsequent requests

 

Further information on section 12 of FOI is available here:

 

[3]https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-co...

 

 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

 

For further information and data on West Midlands Police see our
publication scheme and disclosure log

 

[4]http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/

 

RIGHT OF APPEAL

 

Your attention is drawn to your right to request a re-examination of your
case under West Midlands Police review procedure, which can be found at:

 

[5]http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/revie...

 

Please note that such an appeal must be received within 40 working days of
the date of this correspondence. Any such request received after this time
will only be considered at the discretion of the FOI Unit.

 

If you require any further information, then please do not hesitate to
contact me.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

 

Michelle Richardson | Freedom of Information
Corporate Communications | West Midlands Police
T: 101 (ext. 801 2068)

Preventing crime, protecting the public and helping those in need.

[6]If it’s not 999, search WMP Online

[7]Description: Description: twitter icon [8]Description: Description:
Instagram Icon [9]Description: Description: YouTube Icon [10]Description:
Description: Facebook icon

[11]View all our social network links

 

 

Our vision: Preventing crime, protecting the public and helping those in
need

 

This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged
or confidential information. If received in error, please notify the
originator immediately. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or
alteration of this email is strictly forbidden. Views or opinions
expressed in this email do not necessarily represent those of West
Midlands Police. All West Midlands Police email activity is monitored for
virus, racist, obscene, or otherwise inappropriate activity. No
responsibility is accepted by West Midlands Police for any loss or damage
arising in any way from the receipt or use of this email.

References

Visible links
1. https://www.wmsafetycameras.co.uk/
2. https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/black-c...
3. https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-co...
4. http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/
5. http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/revie...
6. website
https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/
7. http://www.twitter.com/wmpolice
8. http://www.instagram.com/westmidlandspol...
9. http://www.youtube.com/westmidlandspolice
10. http://www.facebook.com/westmidlandspolice
11. Social Networks
https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/cont...

Dear Freedom of Information,
You have dismissed this request as being too expensive to retrieve incident data, because of the way your systems are `organised`, and have not disclosed any lines of accountability, apart from advising that the WMCRS has ceased to exist as such since 2013 and that the police have taken over the responsibility for `enforcement`activities, whilst still apparently being in `partnership`with other agencies, obtaining customers for Speed Awareness Courses Providers (SACPs) who then pay an amount back to the police organisation NDORS, who then forward an amount back to WM police.
From a public perspective the cash flow arrangements are a ball of confusion,and my request, although posted in good faith on the basis that the WMCRS still existed, was proven misconstructed, not realising that the police are now focussed on the enforcement rather than casualty reduction.
On the basis of this revelation my FOI request has been invalidated and, therefore, I wish to mark it as `CLOSED,some information provided`and, in no way a vexatious manner, I hope to reissue a similar request in the near future, but more correctly directed based on the new information provided.

Thank you for your attention in this matter,
This request is now considered closed.

Yours sincerely,

Dennis Fallon(BScHons)

Freedom of Information,

Please accept this as an acknowledgement of receipt of your e-mail by the
Freedom of Information Unit.
 
If your email is a valid request for information under the Freedom of
Information Act, your request will be dealt with within the legislative
deadline of 20 working days.  Should we be unable to meet this deadline
for any reason you will be notified as soon as possible.
 
Please note that if your email is a request is for your own personal data
you should make a subject access request to the Data Protection Unit.  You
can do this by completing a WA162 form, which is available on the West
Midlands Police website.  Search the West Midlands Police website for
'Subject Access' or go directly to this page:
[1]https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/abou...
 
If you require further information please contact 101 and ask for the
Freedom of Information Unit.
 
You might find what you are looking for on our website:
[2]http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/
 
If you have information about any crime, you can contact us on the
non-emergency number: 101.
 
In an emergency, for example where life is in danger or a crime in
progress, call 999.

This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged
or confidential information. If received in error, please notify the
originator immediately. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or
alteration of this email is strictly forbidden. Views or opinions
expressed in this email do not necessarily represent those of West
Midlands Police. All West Midlands Police email activity is monitored for
virus, racist, obscene, or otherwise inappropriate activity. No
responsibility is accepted by West Midlands Police for any loss or damage
arising in any way from the receipt or use of this email.

References

Visible links
1. https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/abou...
2. http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/

Freedom of Information,

Dear Mr Fallon

Please be advised, as per our previous advice on 3rd October 2019, that this office deals with Freedom of Information requests for specific recorded information. Your correspondence below does not contain a request for recorded information under the Act and appears to have only been submitted in order to put on record the opinions that you have, and is only intended to publish your views on a public website.

Please be advised that submission of correspondence to this office should not be made for individuals own purposes or as a platform to air personal grievances. This is considered a mis-use of the force e-mail system.
Freedom of Information legislation cannot be used to circumvent normal business processes in place to deal with issues or complaints, this office does not deal with complaints and will not comment or respond to additional enquiries submitted outside of a FOI request. Should you have an issue with any of the force processes please re-direct these as appropriate.

https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/serv...

No further correspondence will be entered into regarding this matter

Yours Sincerely

Mrs R Williams

59614 Rebecca Williams l FOI Manager
Lloyd House l West Midlands Police
T: 101 (ext 801 2068)
Preventing crime, protecting the public and helping those in need.
If it’s not 999, search WMP Online

show quoted sections

Dear Rebecca Williams,
PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS EMAIL, DO NOT WASTE ANY TIME HERE, YOU HAVE OTHER REQUESTS TO `DEAL` WITH.
I do NOT consider this email to be a serious mis-use of the force e-mail system, and as it is NOT a request you do NOT have to respond to it or demonstrate that you find it irritating. There is nothing untruthful or derogatory or unlawful being posted by me, but you may consider it irrelevant so the best way to `deal`with it is simply have a cup of coffee and ignore it. Your job is simply to identify what is actually a request and `deal` with it, and if it is not a request just ignore it, simples.
Millions died in the cold muddy trenches of 2 World Wars to defend Freedom of Speech, as we remember each November, and it is pretty sad that your office is so intolerant and secretive compared to other forces.
Your FOI Department is the public facing side of West Midlands Police, the department supposedly responsible for directly communicating with the taxpaying public who indirectly pay your wages which you `earn`. I do not believe you have the right to be stroppy or display attitude to anyone, you should not be confusing persistance with vexatiousness and you should not be confusing derogatory with pointing out unpleasant truths and,really, you should not be threatening people when you have the option to behave professionally. You say you `deal`with requests, but on checking numerous requests on the whatdotheyknow website i see your `dealing`involves regularly refusing to provide requested information to most people, using a variety of excuses, feigning ignorance or by unhelpful misuse of the English Language. The reason we seem to be in conflict is that, as a really qualified professional person myself, I have a totally different attitude to dealing with enquiries from the public, I treat EVERYONE with respect, young or old, rich or poor, stupid or intelligent or confused or stressed, relevant or irrelevant questions, yes, even timewasters I treat with respect because I am well versed in sympathising with the rainbow of mental illness.
I am particularly PROUD of this website and its founder CHRIS LIGHTFOOT, who sadly had mental health issues himself, but his legacy means that people of integrity moderate the requests and use their independent judgement to only intervene when totally inappropriate language is used, they tolerate a certain amount of possibly irrelevant verbage if it is truthful as long as the focal point, the information being requested, is clearly identified. Chris Lighfoot RIP should be proud of his creation of an Open Society.
I reject your accusation of `Misuse of Force email system`as most of my extraneous material communicated is simply a deliberate reiteration of truths which the Force tend to delete from their system in a random way, resulting in deadlinks and destroying the value of requests.WM Police seem to have a determined policy of wiping their history clean, it is not a policy I agree with and it renders the organisation very shallow.I expect a much higher level of professionalism from a FOI department and I am sorry if I have upset you by demonstrating that other police forces display a much more helpful an transparent attitude, but it is my civic duty to educate you to the standards that exist outside of the Lloyd House bubble.
You QUOTE "Please be advised that submission of correspondence to this office should not be made for individuals own purposes or as a platform to air personal grievances. This is considered a mis-use of the force e-mail system", i RESPOND " Any of my communication which are considered excessive are merely to put the request in context, to assist the casual visitor to this public website, or to consolidate true facts which are at risk of deletion in the primary source and which are associated to the request, and is therefore subjectively for a valid purpose which only a churlish person would find annoying. I consider the allegation of `misuse of email systems` to be a threatening and inappropriate allegation as it can be demonstrated that it has only been a reiteration of truths to put the requests in context for people who do not have local knowledge.
You QUOTE "this office does not deal with complaints and will not comment or respond to additional enquiries submitted outside of a FOI request. Should you have an issue with any of the force processes please re-direct these as appropriate ". I RESPOND " i do NOT expect you deal with complaints or comment or respond to additional enquiries submitted outside of a FOI request", please try to understand that anything posted outside of a FOI request is NOT for you to deal with, it is simply posted to justify the request or put it in context for the general public". Reference dealing with issues through established procedures, I do not do this since discovering that the standard complaints system to the IOPC is a fake system with no one at the IOPC actually reviewing complaints, the complaint is simply forwarded back to the originating force and is a waste of time. I have a policy of no longer following fake procedures .
All my requests are justified, though you may consider them annoying, and you may deal with them bluntly or rudely if you wish, but be aware your responses are displayed on the public record.
I do not accept your threats.

Wear your Poppy with pride, and look in the mirror.

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, THE REQUEST IS CLOSED.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, THE REQUEST IS CLOSED.

Yours sincerely,

Dennis Fallon (BScHons)

Freedom of Information,

Dear Mr Fallon

As previously advised, on more than one occasion, this office deals with Freedom of Information requests for specific recorded information. Your correspondence submitted on 21st October 2019 does not contain a request for recorded information under the Act and appears to have only been submitted in order to put on record the opinions that you have, and is only intended to publish your views on a public website.

Please be advised that submission of correspondence to this office should not be made for individuals own purposes or as a platform to air personal grievances. This is considered a mis-use of the force e-mail system.

For these reasons the e-mail <[FOI #597742 email]> has now been blocked

No further correspondence will be entered into regarding this matter

Yours Sincerely

Mrs R Williams

59614 Rebecca Williams l FOI Manager
Lloyd House l West Midlands Police
T: 101 (ext 801 2068)
Preventing crime, protecting the public and helping those in need.
If it’s not 999, search WMP Online

View all our social network links

show quoted sections