North East Lincolnshire Council and Cofely subsiding block paving and poor workmanship

Waiting for an internal review by North East Lincolnshire Council of their handling of this request.

Dear North East Lincolnshire Council,

Since the paving was installed in the Top Town area in December last year as part of a £6 million redevelopment, the Grimsby Telegraph has reported at least six occasions when repairs have had to be made as a result of the paving blocks lifting and breaking up.

I understand that Cofely and their contractors had used sub-grade sand mixed with clay instead of the correct graded sand to support the paving blocks, which is the primary cause of the subsidence of and damage to the paving blocks. I also understand the existing and underlying surfaces of the paving areas were not properly planed to support the foundation of the paving blocks which is also a contributory factor in their subsidence. Please a copy of all investigation reports and other information the council and their partner Cofely hold in relation to these particular matters.

I also understand that Cofely's tender for the £6 million redevelopment was not the lowest tender but the council selected Cofely as their presentation to the council was 'better' than others provided to the local authority. Please provide copy of Cofely's presentation to the council together with copies of the unsuccessful presentations that were also provided to the council, which they hold.

The council have recently said in the Grimsby Telegraph in relation to the block paving repair works that, “These works are being undertaken under the existing contract with no additional cost to the council.” I understand the council have already employed third party contractors to rectify the block paving and their invoices are paid directly by the council. Please provide a copy of all third party contractors invoices the council have received and hold in relation to this particular matter..

Yours faithfully,

Alan

PPD - FOI, North East Lincolnshire Council

Dear Sir,

 

I am pleased to acknowledge your request for information, which has been
allocated the reference number 8775_1415.

Your request has been passed to the relevant department for processing and
you can expect your response within the 20 working day limit. If it will
take us longer than 20 working days to respond to you, we will inform you
of this and provide you with the expected date for receiving a response.

Further information about how we will deal with your Freedom of
Information requests is available on our website at:
[1]http://www.nelincs.gov.uk/council/the-co....

Please feel free to contact me if you require any further information or
assistance quoting the reference number above.

 

Yours sincerely on behalf of North East Lincolnshire Council

 

Feedback Officer

Resources Directorate

 

show quoted sections

Dear North East Lincolnshire Council,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of North East Lincolnshire Council's handling of my FOI request 'North East Lincolnshire Council and Cofely subsiding block paving and poor workmanship'.

I have not received a reply within 20 working days.

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

Yours faithfully,

Alan

PPD - FOI, North East Lincolnshire Council

Dear Alan

We have attempted to send the response to this information request, reference 8775_1415, on two occasions 09/12/2014 and 11/12/2014. Unfortunately it appears to not be received by the What Do They Know website. You may wish to contact the website administrators to determine why this may be. The email is approximately 11 MB in size and it may be that this file size is causing it to not be received. If they are unable to resolve this please let me know and I will look at how we can resolve the issue.

Should you wish to proceed with an internal review before receiving the information please let me know.

Yours sincerely on behalf of North East Lincolnshire Council

Feedback Officer

Resources Directorate

show quoted sections

Dear PPD - FOI,

Thank you. I will now contact WDTK.com.

Please do not carry out the requested internal review at this time.

Yours sincerely,

Alan

Richard Taylor left an annotation ()

Alan,

There are very many examples of public bodies successfully sending attachments of this size via our service.

I suspect the problem is probably with the council's email system.

We will contact them directly to discuss this and to try and help them.

Regards,

--

Richard - WhatDoTheyKnow.com volunteer

PPD - FOI, North East Lincolnshire Council

1 Attachment

Dear Alan

 

Further to our earlier correspondence please see below the original
response and attached the information which has now been reduced in file
size and zipped. Hopefully this should now be received.

 

If you believe that your request for information has not been handled in
accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, you have the right to
request an internal review by the Council. Please be clear about which
elements of the Council’s response or handling of the request you are
unhappy with, and would like the Council to address during the internal
review process.  If following this you are still dissatisfied you may
contact the Office of the Information Commissioner. If you wish to request
an internal review, please contact me and I will make the necessary
arrangements.

 

Yours sincerely on behalf of North East Lincolnshire Council

 

Feedback Officer

 

Resources Directorate

 

 

From: PPD - FOI
Sent: 09 December 2014 14:58
To: '[FOI #238303 email]'
Subject: Freedom of Information request 8775_1415

 

Dear Alan

 

Thank you for your information request, reference number 8775_1415.  I
wish to confirm that North East Lincolnshire Council holds the following
information.

 

Since the paving was installed in the Top Town area in December last year
as part of a £6 million redevelopment, the Grimsby Telegraph has reported
at least six occasions when repairs have had to be made as a result of the
paving blocks lifting and breaking up.

 

I understand that Cofely and their contractors had used sub-grade sand
mixed with clay instead of the correct graded sand to support the paving
blocks, which is the primary cause of the subsidence of and damage to the
paving blocks.  I also understand the existing and underlying surfaces of
the paving areas were not properly planed to support the foundation of the
paving blocks which is also a contributory factor in their subsidence. 
Please a copy of all investigation reports and other information the
council and their partner Cofely hold in relation to these particular
matters.

 

Please find attached a copy of the tender construction detail and
specification for the paving laid in the shared space on Bethlehem Street
in December 2013. There is also a report which provides recommendations
for the relaying of the paving which was carried out in May 2014.

 

I also understand that Cofely's tender for the £6 million redevelopment
was not the lowest tender but the council selected Cofely as their
presentation to the council was 'better' than others provided to the local
authority.  Please provide copy of Cofely's presentation to the council
together with copies of the unsuccessful presentations that were also
provided to the council, which they hold.

 

The tender submission from Birse and the unsuccessful tender submissions
are commercially confidential.  The tender process was a competitive
tender process and the evaluation of the tender responses was undertaken
using the Most Economically Advantageous Tender (MEAT) criteria 60%
Quality and 40% Price Split.  Attached is the Tender Evaluation Plan which
highlights the scores following the tender assessment (with commercially
sensitive information removed).

 

The council have recently said in the Grimsby Telegraph in relation to the
block paving repair works that, “These works are being undertaken under
the existing contract with no additional cost to the council.”  I
understand the council have already employed third party contractors to
rectify the block paving and their invoices are paid directly by the
council.  Please provide a copy of all third party contractors invoices
the council have received and hold in relation to this particular matter..

 

The recent isolated repairs to the paving have been arranged and paid for
by Cofely and are not a cost borne by the Council.

 

If you believe that your request for information has not been handled in
accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, you have the right to
request an internal review by the Council. Please be clear about which
elements of the Council’s response or handling of the request you are
unhappy with, and would like the Council to address during the internal
review process.  If following this you are still dissatisfied you may
contact the Office of the Information Commissioner. If you wish to request
an internal review, please contact me and I will make the necessary
arrangements.

 

Yours sincerely on behalf of North East Lincolnshire Council

 

Feedback Officer

 

Resources Directorate

 

show quoted sections

Dear North East Lincolnshire Council,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of North East Lincolnshire Council's handling of my FOI request 'North East Lincolnshire Council and Cofely subsiding block paving and poor workmanship'.

I have not received all of the requested information.

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

Yours faithfully,

Alan

PPD - FOI, North East Lincolnshire Council

Dear Alan

 

I am pleased to acknowledge your correspondence and wish to confirm that
an Internal Review of the handling of your Information Request 8775_1415
is to take place.

 

The Internal Review has been passed to the relevant department for
processing and you can expect your response within the 20 working day
limit. If it will take us longer than 20 working days to respond to you,
we will inform you of this and provide you with the expected date for
receiving a response.

 

Further information about how we will deal with your Freedom of
Information requests is available on our website at:
[1]http://www.nelincs.gov.uk/council/the-co....

 

Please feel free to contact me if you require any further information or
assistance quoting the reference number above.

 

Yours sincerely on behalf of North East Lincolnshire Council

 

Feedback Officer

Resources Directorate

 

show quoted sections

PPD - FOI, North East Lincolnshire Council

Dear Alan

Further to your request an Internal Review has taken place into the
handling of your information request 8775-1415, concerning the
installation of paving blocks.

I have reviewed the response provided to you and the handling of your
request in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act and find:

1)    That your request was responded to within the statutory time of 20
working days.

Please accept my apology for the delay in responding.

2)    The first part of your request related to the foundation of the
paving blocks, asked for a copy of all investigation reports and other
information the council and their partner Cofely hold in relation to these
particular matters.

In response to this we provided you with the following information we hold
namely the tender construction detail and specification for the paving
laid in the shared space on Bethlehem Street in December 2013. There is
also a report which provides recommendations for the relaying of the
paving which was carried out in May 2014 by Dr Dowson.

I am therefore satisfied that this part of your request has been responded
to in accordance with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act.

3)    The second part of your request related to the tendering process,
and asked for a copy of Cofely's presentation to the council together with
copies of the unsuccessful presentations that were also provided to the
council, which they hold.

The response provided you with Tender Evaluation Plan and stated that the
tender submissions from Birse and the unsuccessful tender submissions are
commercially confidential.  The tender process was a competitive tender
process and the evaluation of the tender responses was undertaken using
the Most Economically Advantageous Tender (MEAT) criteria 60% Quality and
40% Price Split. 

I am therefore satisfied that this part of your request has not been
responded to in accordance with the requirements of the Freedom of
Information Act.

The response should have stated that disclosure of the tender submissions
from Birse and the unsuccessful tender submissions are exempt from
disclosure by virtue of section 43 (2) of the Freedom of Information Act,
as disclosure would be likely to prejudice the commercial interests of the
companies submitting the tenders. The basis of the prejudice is that the
tenderer’s response (presentation) to the Council detail and evidence
their commercial approach to delivering services and tendering for
contracts. By disclosing this information, the Council would be disclosing
tenderers' competitive advantage in terms of discernible value added offer
built up through embedded commercial practice and operation. On this basis
we consider that the tenders in full should be withheld from disclosure on
the basis that their disclosure would prejudice the commercial interests
of the identified parties

 

Section 43 is a qualified exemption, therefore before it can be applied,
the balance of public interest must be demonstrated to be in favour of
withholding the information. It is considered that the public interest is
to ensure organisation are able to compete fairly in tender processes, and
that there is competition for public sector contracts.

I am therefore satisfied that tender submissions are exempt from
disclosure by virtue of section 43 (2) of the Freedom of Information Act.

4)    The final part of your request related to the repair of the block
paving, and asked for a copy of all third party contractors invoices the
council have received and hold in relation to this particular matter..

The response confirmed that the recent isolated repairs to the paving had
been arranged and paid for by Cofely and that the cost was not borne by
the Council.

The response should have further confirmed that North East Lincolnshire
Council does not hold the third party contractor invoices requested.
Further as the work was not undertaken by Cofely on behalf of North East
Lincolnshire Council, or as part of the Regeneration Partnership, the
information requested (the third party contractor invoices) is not held by
Cofely on behalf of North East Lincolnshire Council.

I am satisfied that the North East Lincolnshire Council do not hold the
third party contractor invoices you have requested.

If you remain dissatisfied with the Council’s handling of your request, or
the decision of the internal review you can request an independent review
by contacting the Information Commissioner's Office at Wycliffe House,
Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

Yours sincerely on behalf of North East Lincolnshire Council

Feedback Officer, Resources Directorate

show quoted sections

Paul Smith left an annotation ()

Quote:

"Section 43 is a qualified exemption, therefore before it can be applied, the balance of public interest must be demonstrated to be in favour of withholding the information. It is considered that the public interest is to ensure organisation are able to compete fairly in tender processes, and that there is competition for public sector contracts.

I am therefore satisfied that tender submissions are exempt from disclosure by virtue of section 43 (2) of the Freedom of Information Act."

It seems obvious that the balance of public interest lies in disclosing the information. The council's loyalty should be with its residents not contractor.

The Council would provide better value for money in its business dealings if these tender submissions were released thus creating a more competitive environment for any future tendering process.

Effectively, North East Lincolnshire Council is helping create a monopoly for its current contractors by not disclosing the information. This most definitely is not in the public interest.

If North East Lincolnshire Council was in fact mindful about providing the best value for money in these particular circumstances it would bring more of its work in-house, potentially saving huge amounts of public money.