Post by Deleted on May 20, 2018 17:36:25 GMT
I'm not sure whose looking like the silliest Billy here, but CRT putting this sort of reply into the public domain definitely makes them look stupid in my view. Very amateur.
Melissa Ashdown-Hoff, Canal & River Trust 17 May 2018
Dear Mr Richards,
I am writing to you regarding the two most recent requests for information
you submitted to the Canal & River Trust which we are dealing with under
the Freedom of Information Act.
You requested the following information:
1. The minutes of the Board of Trustees Meeting held on 22 March in York.
2. The unpublished papers from the Board of Trustees Meeting held on 25
January in Coventry.
3. A copy of minute 18/007 (which appears to have been inadvertently left
out of published minutes).
4. Copies of any report or presentation made by Jon Horsfall, Matthew
Symonds or any other person in connection with minute 18/007. This
includes both reports and presentations made during Board meetings, prior
to Board meetings or subsequent to Board meetings.
And
Freedom of Information Request Section 77 complaint. I refer to my request
- 'Waterways Partnerships Action Plans', full details of which can be
found
at[1]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/w...
In particular, I refer to discrepancies between information provided to
Frazer Halcrow, Information Officer Assistant, and the information he
subsequently provided to me.
Please provide via whatdotheyknow.com copies of any internal
communications made in relation to this request prior to Mr Halcrow’s
response to me dated 4 December 2017.
I am refusing both your requests for information under section 14 of the
Freedom of Information Act as I believe that they can be described as
disproportionate and unjustified and fall under the definition of what can
reasonably be considered as Vexatious. The legislation under section 14
states that:
“Section 1(1) does not oblige a public authority to comply with a request
for information if the request is vexatious.”
The Freedom of Information Act was designed to give individuals a right of
access to information held by the public sector in order to improve
accountability and transparency. Section 14 of the Freedom of Information
Act was established to protect the public sector from those individuals
who choose to misuse the Act by submitting request with the intention of
being annoying or disruptive or have a disproportionate impact on the
public body. The Information Commissioners guidance on the use of section
can be found using the following link:
ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio...
In the guidance document the Information Commissioner states that:
” Section 14(1) is designed to protect public authorities by allowing them
to refuse any requests which have the potential to cause a
disproportionate or unjustified level of disruption, irritation or
distress.”
This year alone to date your requests account for 24% of all the Freedom
of Information Requests received by the Trust. You have also requested 1
internal review and have complained to the Information Commissioner. In
2017 your requests for information accounted for 19% of the total number
of requests for information received by the Trust and you submitted 4
requests for an internal review. The volume of requests that you are
submitting to the Trust is placing an undue burden on the Trust and
diverting resources of the Trust.
The scope of your requests are broad. You have requested on numerous
occasion details of minutes of meetings and have also requested
information on how we have dealt with your requests of information, the
waterway ombudsman, the costs of legal action, business plans and waterway
partnerships. I can see no overriding public interest, purpose or value in
the requests which would prompt the volume and frequency other than an
attempt to cause annoyance or disruption to the Trust.
In addition to the volume of requests I am also aware that you are an
author of an online interest and campaigning group called The Floater. One
of the stated aims of Floater is:
“Original campaign group protesting the creation of Canal & River Trust”
I am also aware that you have posted on line the details of officer’s
names and photos of 3 Trust employees without their consent and made
allegations that offences have been committed under section 77 of the
Freedom of Information Act. I would ask that you remove these photos
immediately as I believe that posting these photos without the consent of
the individuals is an invasion of the officer’s privacy. Posting the
details online along with the content of the article caused unwarranted
harassment and distress to employees of the Trust.
When reaching this decision I noted the decision in the case of
Information Commissioner & Devon County Council v Dransfield
(GIA/3037/2011). In this case Judge Wikely identified four broad issues or
themes identified in that case as being indicators of whether a request
can be said to be vexatious. These are:
(a) The burden placed on the public authority and its staff;
(b) The motive of the requestor;
(c) The value or serious purpose of the request, and
(d) Any harassment of, or distress caused to, the public authority's
staff.
Judge Wikely stated that “section 14 serves the legitimate public interest
in public authorities not being exposed to irresponsible use of FOIA,
especially by repeat requestors whose enquiries may represent an undue and
disproportionate burden on scarce public resources.”
Having looked at the number of requests for information that you have
submitted this year and in previous years and considered the burden that
compliance with your requests for information are placing on the Trust and
also considering the purpose for which you are seeking access to this
information and the harassment of Trust employees by posting articles and
photos online, I have decided that your requests for information can
reasonably be defined as vexatious and are therefore section 14 of the
Freedom of Information Act is engaged.
The Canal & River Trust is committed to being open and transparent and
engage in dialogue with all of our customers and critics. It is
reluctantly that we are refusing your recent requests using section 14 of
the Freedom of Information Act. However, your use of the Act in requesting
a broad spectrum of information in increasing volumes is placing an
unjustified burden on the Trust, and we can no longer justify committing
the resources necessary to dealing with your requests for information. The
Trust will also not tolerate the harassment of our employees. The posting
on the Floater Facebook page of photos harvested from the social media
accounts of our employees is unwarranted and can be characterised as
harassment.
If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request, you have the
right to ask for an internal review. Internal review requests should be
submitted within two months of the date of this email and should be sent
by email to or by post to Information Officer, Legal Department, Canal &
River Trust, Canal & River Trust, Fearns Wharf, Neptune Street, Leeds, LS9
8PB. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications. You are also able to contact the Information Commissioner
by telephoning 0303 123 1113 although please note they would usually
expect you to have gone through our internal review procedure before
contacting them.
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have
the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a
decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at Information
Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, and Cheshire,
SK9 5AF.
Yours sincerely
Melissa Ashdown-Hoff
Information Officer – Legal and Governance Services
Melissa Ashdown-Hoff, Canal & River Trust 17 May 2018
Dear Mr Richards,
I am writing to you regarding the two most recent requests for information
you submitted to the Canal & River Trust which we are dealing with under
the Freedom of Information Act.
You requested the following information:
1. The minutes of the Board of Trustees Meeting held on 22 March in York.
2. The unpublished papers from the Board of Trustees Meeting held on 25
January in Coventry.
3. A copy of minute 18/007 (which appears to have been inadvertently left
out of published minutes).
4. Copies of any report or presentation made by Jon Horsfall, Matthew
Symonds or any other person in connection with minute 18/007. This
includes both reports and presentations made during Board meetings, prior
to Board meetings or subsequent to Board meetings.
And
Freedom of Information Request Section 77 complaint. I refer to my request
- 'Waterways Partnerships Action Plans', full details of which can be
found
at[1]https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/w...
In particular, I refer to discrepancies between information provided to
Frazer Halcrow, Information Officer Assistant, and the information he
subsequently provided to me.
Please provide via whatdotheyknow.com copies of any internal
communications made in relation to this request prior to Mr Halcrow’s
response to me dated 4 December 2017.
I am refusing both your requests for information under section 14 of the
Freedom of Information Act as I believe that they can be described as
disproportionate and unjustified and fall under the definition of what can
reasonably be considered as Vexatious. The legislation under section 14
states that:
“Section 1(1) does not oblige a public authority to comply with a request
for information if the request is vexatious.”
The Freedom of Information Act was designed to give individuals a right of
access to information held by the public sector in order to improve
accountability and transparency. Section 14 of the Freedom of Information
Act was established to protect the public sector from those individuals
who choose to misuse the Act by submitting request with the intention of
being annoying or disruptive or have a disproportionate impact on the
public body. The Information Commissioners guidance on the use of section
can be found using the following link:
ico.org.uk/media/for-organisatio...
In the guidance document the Information Commissioner states that:
” Section 14(1) is designed to protect public authorities by allowing them
to refuse any requests which have the potential to cause a
disproportionate or unjustified level of disruption, irritation or
distress.”
This year alone to date your requests account for 24% of all the Freedom
of Information Requests received by the Trust. You have also requested 1
internal review and have complained to the Information Commissioner. In
2017 your requests for information accounted for 19% of the total number
of requests for information received by the Trust and you submitted 4
requests for an internal review. The volume of requests that you are
submitting to the Trust is placing an undue burden on the Trust and
diverting resources of the Trust.
The scope of your requests are broad. You have requested on numerous
occasion details of minutes of meetings and have also requested
information on how we have dealt with your requests of information, the
waterway ombudsman, the costs of legal action, business plans and waterway
partnerships. I can see no overriding public interest, purpose or value in
the requests which would prompt the volume and frequency other than an
attempt to cause annoyance or disruption to the Trust.
In addition to the volume of requests I am also aware that you are an
author of an online interest and campaigning group called The Floater. One
of the stated aims of Floater is:
“Original campaign group protesting the creation of Canal & River Trust”
I am also aware that you have posted on line the details of officer’s
names and photos of 3 Trust employees without their consent and made
allegations that offences have been committed under section 77 of the
Freedom of Information Act. I would ask that you remove these photos
immediately as I believe that posting these photos without the consent of
the individuals is an invasion of the officer’s privacy. Posting the
details online along with the content of the article caused unwarranted
harassment and distress to employees of the Trust.
When reaching this decision I noted the decision in the case of
Information Commissioner & Devon County Council v Dransfield
(GIA/3037/2011). In this case Judge Wikely identified four broad issues or
themes identified in that case as being indicators of whether a request
can be said to be vexatious. These are:
(a) The burden placed on the public authority and its staff;
(b) The motive of the requestor;
(c) The value or serious purpose of the request, and
(d) Any harassment of, or distress caused to, the public authority's
staff.
Judge Wikely stated that “section 14 serves the legitimate public interest
in public authorities not being exposed to irresponsible use of FOIA,
especially by repeat requestors whose enquiries may represent an undue and
disproportionate burden on scarce public resources.”
Having looked at the number of requests for information that you have
submitted this year and in previous years and considered the burden that
compliance with your requests for information are placing on the Trust and
also considering the purpose for which you are seeking access to this
information and the harassment of Trust employees by posting articles and
photos online, I have decided that your requests for information can
reasonably be defined as vexatious and are therefore section 14 of the
Freedom of Information Act is engaged.
The Canal & River Trust is committed to being open and transparent and
engage in dialogue with all of our customers and critics. It is
reluctantly that we are refusing your recent requests using section 14 of
the Freedom of Information Act. However, your use of the Act in requesting
a broad spectrum of information in increasing volumes is placing an
unjustified burden on the Trust, and we can no longer justify committing
the resources necessary to dealing with your requests for information. The
Trust will also not tolerate the harassment of our employees. The posting
on the Floater Facebook page of photos harvested from the social media
accounts of our employees is unwarranted and can be characterised as
harassment.
If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request, you have the
right to ask for an internal review. Internal review requests should be
submitted within two months of the date of this email and should be sent
by email to or by post to Information Officer, Legal Department, Canal &
River Trust, Canal & River Trust, Fearns Wharf, Neptune Street, Leeds, LS9
8PB. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications. You are also able to contact the Information Commissioner
by telephoning 0303 123 1113 although please note they would usually
expect you to have gone through our internal review procedure before
contacting them.
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have
the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a
decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at Information
Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, and Cheshire,
SK9 5AF.
Yours sincerely
Melissa Ashdown-Hoff
Information Officer – Legal and Governance Services