This person's Freedom of Information requests (approximately 30)
FOI2018/11542
Jonathan Baines
[FOI #508374 email]
Dear Mr Baines,
Thank you for your email of 8 August, in which you made the following
reques...
Dear Mr Baines,
Please see attached response to your Freedom of Information request.
Regards
Freedom of Information
Central Disclosure...
Dear Mr Baines
Thank you for your Freedom of Information Request under the terms of the
Freedom of Information Act 2000.
In response to yo...
Dear Justin
Many thanks.
Best wishes,
Jon
Dear Mr Baines,
Re: Freedom of Information request (Our Ref: FOI-054200)
Thank you for your Freedom of Information (FOI) request dated...
Dear Mr Baines
Please find attached the response to your Freedom of Information request.
We apologise that this is late. Missing a statutor...
Dear Pierrette
Many thanks.
Yours sincerely,
Jonathan Baines
Thank you for contacting the Information Commissioner’s Office. We confirm
that we have received your correspondence.
If you have made a request...
13 April 2015
Case Reference Number IRQ0574435
Dear Mr Baines,
Please find attached PDF 3 of 3. This concludes our response to your
requ...
Many thanks Kunjal
Yours sincerely,
Jonathan Baines
12 December 2014
Case Reference Number IRQ0561451
Dear Mr Baines
Thank you for your email.
When the ICO comes to a conclusion about thi...
Dear Mr Baines
Thank you for your request for a review. Please find attached a letter of response.
Yours sincerely
Iain Hockenhull
Head of Corr...
Thank you for contacting the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). This
message is to confirm that we have received your correspondence. Please do...
PROTECT
7 January 2014
Case Reference Number IRQ0525832
Dear Mr Baines
Thank you for your message, stating that your request is wit...
Many thanks Steven
Best wishes
Jonathan Baines
PROTECT
16th August 2013
Case Reference Number IRQ0505313
Part 5 attached (final response).
Information Commissioner's Office, Wycl...
Interesting... first point responses on FOIA enquiries made through the Whatdotheyknow website always pass through the website. I see no evidence of a...
Dear Birgitte
Many thanks for the disclosure
with best wishes
Jonathan Baines
Thank you for emailing the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO). This
is an automatic acknowledgement to tell you we have received your email
saf...
Dear Rebecca
Many thanks for your comprehensive reply.
Yours sincerely
Jonathan Baines
Dear Rachel
Many thanks for the reply, and it's good to note the data security procedures you have in place.
Yours sincerely,
Jonathan Baines
See also;
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/undertaking_enf0407902
PROTECT
21 December 2012
Case Reference Number IRQ0476845
Dear Mr Baines
Further to our acknowledgment of 11 December 2012 we are now in a p...
PROTECT
28 September 2012
Case Reference Number IRQ0462817
Dear Mr Baines
Please find further information attached. This is the final email. ...
Thank you for emailing the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). This
is an automatic acknowledgement to tell you we have received your email
saf...
This person's 34 annotations
I thought this was such an extraordinary refusal, I blogged about it here: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/enforcement_in_4_sectors#outgoing-827...
As it may take a while for ICO to reply, I can confirm that there is no distinction in the DPA 2018 between public authorities and other entities when...
ICO suggest that there is only one document in scope here, and as the obligation of confidence cannot apply to correspondence sent *from* ICO *to* Fave...
I do find this odd. In the foreword to the book (which appears to have been withdrawn by its publisher: https://www.koganpage.com/search-results?keywor...
This is a remarkable refusal by ICO.
Firstly, they have failed to state - before moving to the public interest test - why it is reasonable in the ci...
ICO publishes a spreadsheet of all civil monetary penalties since 2010 at https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/csvs/2259491/civil-monetary-penalt...
Oddly, the book in question appears to have been withdrawn from the publisher's website.
The data controller in relation to Interpol Manchester appears to be the National Crime Agency https://ico.org.uk/ESDWebPages/Entry/ZA019117 (see https...
The judgment has now been correctly uploaded. You can find contact details for the Tribunal at https://www.gov.uk/guidance/information-rights-appeal-a...
Well yes, that's true, but that's an offence of failing to comply with an enforcement notice, not failing to comply with PECR, so it's at one remove. B...
The answer to this has to be "no information held" or "none", because there are no offence provisions within the Privacy and Electronic Communications...
"we consider that the full content of the complaints received from complainants is personal data to them and as such exempt from disclosure under the...
I only recently made exactly the same request. The figures show 50(2)(c) is hardly ever applied, and that there had been, as at June last year, no incr...
[In response to a request for comments from the requester].
The public interest test undertaken under section 35(1)(a) is at best cursory, and the onl...
Paul Staples said
"The problem as I see it is that no matter how expansively one interprets s11, where the requester actually admits that he has had t...
Paul Staples said
"the combined effect of s1(1)(5) and s1(5) is clear. If the authority HAS in fact communicated the information requested to the requ...
I've just noticed that the complaint in the original posting here was in relation to an internal review sent to the requester's private email address....
I think I'm going to do something rarely seen, and disagree with my esteemed colleague Mr Turner. Section 11(1)(a) of FOIA provides that
"Where, on m...
"An Act to amend the Laws relating to Local Government in England and Wales, and for other purposes connected therewith."
(http://www.legislation.gov....
It's an interesting area, and, on the domestic front, there's been quite a bit of case law on Sch 2(6) (although in the context of disclosure of person...
"The 1% scenario is where the 2002 Regulations' reasonable cause threshold is met, but the Data Protection Act's Sch 2 requirements are not."
OK, I fo...
Your concern there is with compliance with the 2002 Regulations, not with the Regulations themselves. They provide the Schedule 2 condition. If a discl...
I'm not sure I follow - there are any number of express and implied gateways for data sharing which legitimise processing (eg by disclosure) of persona...
DVLA will be able potentially to point to a number of conditions in Schedule 2 of the Data Protection Act 1998 to legitimise the disclosure. Specifical...
As an alternative to the ICO's own site you could try the facility at www.icopen.info (not affiliated with, or endorsed by the ICO in any way). This gi...