Blog Image

Alan Dransfield's Blog

Freedom of Information and Health and Safety

This blog is aimed at shaming those who ignore health and safety and those who abuse the Freedom of Information Act out of laziness, corruption or to cover up incompetence.

ICO doesn’t keep a disclosure log (sigh)

Information Commissioner Posted on Thu, December 05, 2019 11:04:24

From: alan dransfield <alanmdransfield@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 8:49 AM
Subject: London Mayor FOIA Disclosure Log
To: elizabeth.denham <elizabeth.denham@ico.org.uk>
Cc: <mayt@parliament.uk>, John BERCOW <john.bercow.mp@parliament.uk>, <news@dailymail.co.uk>, CHANNEL 4 <news@channel4.com>, The Local Denmark <news.denmark@thelocal.com>,

Eleizabeth Denham

Information Commissioner

Dear Madam.

I have taken the liberty in sending you this FOI Disclosure Log from the London Mayor’s Office. This is an excellent site and in full compliance with section 19 of the FOIA 2000. 

The reason I have sent it to you is because the ICO are in breach of the FOIA section 19 because you do not have any disclosure log at your website. This is compounded by the fact the ICO/FOIA are in constitutional crisis because the Cabinet Office have hijacked the FOIA 2000 whilst being in contempt of court ref the Lockerbie Bombing and Libya Papers inter alia.

For clarity and avoidance of doubt the ICO disclosure log should not be mistaken for the ICO Decision Notices website. The ICO have a legal obligation in accordance with section 19 to  publish their FOIA requests and response in a similar fashion to the attached URL Link. Are you not supposed to lead by example?

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

https://www.london.gov.uk/about-us/governance-and-spending/sharing-our-information/freedom-information/foi-disclosure-log?order=DESC



A new low for the ICO?

Information Commissioner Posted on Thu, December 05, 2019 10:59:26

Information Commissioners Office

To Elizabeth Denham, Information Commissioner

19/11/201

Dear Madam

There is compelling evidence that you and your office have acted in concert to pervert the course of justice and to hide infant deaths at Shrewsbury Hospital. Please see the attached ICO decision which relies on section 40 (personal data). It was not personal data that this FOIA requester was seeking, it was a total number of deaths not the ID of the infants. This ICO decision clearly supports my claims of egregious conduct by the ICO and Shrewsbury Health Trust

Yours etc

Alan M Dransfield

FOIA Campaigner and Social Watchdog

https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2019/2615555/fs50841738.pdf



Why the secrecy from British Transport Police?

Uncategorised Posted on Thu, December 05, 2019 10:52:36

Paul Crowther Chief Constable

British Transport Police

27/11/2019

Dear Sir

It is exactly four months since the  suicide of Mr Robert Pickthall and you have failed to publish any details of this specific death. I am sure the general public would like to see how, why, when Mr Robert Pickthall died on Network Rail premises. I fervently believe you are guilty of egregious conduct in the manner you have investigated this specific death. I have been advised by your staff that I am a key person and would be kept informed which has NOT happened. I was advised 8 weeks ago that the British Transport Police “re-investigated” this death. Are you in a position to define the re-investigation?

I have also been advised by one of your subordinate  staff  that you have not failed your duty of care directly and actions of your staff cannot be held accountable by your good self. My response to that is hogwash; you are the Chief Constable of the BTP and the actions and inaction of your officers are indeed the direct responsibility of the Chief Constable. If your officers have ignored the general public’s concerns that foul play is the root cause of Robert Pickthall’s death, then you are responsible for your officers.

One thing is for sure Robert Pickthall did not jump under the Euston Flyer and the BTP and you in particular have failed your fiduciary duty of care.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

FOI Requester and Social Watchdog



Imminent changes to vexatious exemptions?

Information Commissioner, Vexatious Posted on Sun, October 27, 2019 11:16:06

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5d9f2411e5274a596f829bdc/GIA_0171_2019-00.pdf



Human rights abuses by the UK Information Commissioner

Information Commissioner, Vexatious Posted on Sun, October 27, 2019 08:07:53

Joint Committee on Human Rights
Houses of Parliament
London
SW1A 0AA

Dear Sirs

I wish to report serious and consistent breaches of article 10 of  Human Rights Act by the Information Commissioner (IC) in the manner they are using section 14/1 of the FOIA 2000. 

I contend the ICO and the Justice Department are failing their fiduciary duty of care to ensure VEXATIOUS has been given full legal definition of the word. At this juncture,  the ICO and tribunals are relying upon the Dransfield Vexatious Court Precedent (DVCP)(2015)EWCA Civ 454 14th May 2015 which infringes article 10 of  the Human Rights Act. Moreover, the ICO have used the DVCP over 10,000 times since  the Upper Tribunal decision UKUT 440 (AAC) in Jan 2013. Most, if not all Government departments are also breaching article 10 of the HRA when they rely upon the DVCP.

I respectfully call upon the UK Joint Committee on Human Rights to investigate my allegations please.

with thanks

Yours sincerely 

Alan M Dransfield 

FOIA Campaigner and Social Watchdog



Is Elizabeth Denham, Information Commissioner, guilty of egregious conduct?

Information Commissioner, Uncategorised Posted on Sun, October 27, 2019 07:57:00

https://legaldictionary.net/egregious/



Not only do we have ambiguity on VEXATIOUS, we now have similar rubbish on DECISION definition

Information Commissioner Posted on Sun, October 06, 2019 15:13:52


Deplorable actions by Chester West and Chester Council

Robert Pickthall RIP Posted on Sat, October 05, 2019 07:25:30

The following letter is from the ICO and 4 days later the Chester West and Chester Council initiated custodial sentence action against Rob Pickthall.

Subject: Data Protection Complaint – Cheshire West and Chester (SAR 11.3.19)[Ref. RFA0841076]

11 July 2019

Case Reference Number RFA0841076


Dear Mr Pickthall,
 
Thank you for your complaint against Cheshire West and Chester Council. This case has been given the following reference number RFA0841076.
 
Your complaint states that the Council have failed to respond to you subject access request of 11 March 2019.
 
The ICO’s role 

Part of our role is to consider complaints from individuals who believe there has been an infringement of their data protection rights.
 
The law says we must investigate data protection complaints to an appropriate extent. We will put most of our effort into dealing with matters we think give us the best opportunity to make a significant difference to an organisation’s information rights practices.
 
Depending on the circumstances, we will decide whether or not to take action against the organisation and what form our action will take. We do this by taking an overview of all concerns that are raised about that organisation with a view to improving their compliance with the data protection framework. Our decision will not affect your ability to enforce your rights through the courts.
 
Our View
 
We have considered the information available in relation to this complaint and we are of the view that the Council has not complied with their Data Protection obligations in this instance.
 
As such, we have now asked the Council to respond to you directly as a matter of priority.
 
Further Action
 
We do not consider that any further action from the ICO is necessary at this time and we do not intend to pursue this complaint any further. However, please be advised that we keep a record of all the complaints raised with us about the way organisations process personal information. The information we gather from complaints may form the basis for action in the future where appropriate.
 
Right to judicial remedy and compensation [GDPR Articles 79 & 82]
 
Individuals have the right to take proceedings to court if they believe their information rights have been infringed. This means that if a court is satisfied that the individual’s rights have been infringed it may order the controller or processor in question to take steps to comply with its Data protection obligations. Individuals who have suffered material or non-material damage (such as distress) as a result of an infringement may also be able to receive compensation from the controller or processor.
 
Please be advised that this is not a process with which the Information Commissioner’s Office is able to assist and we recommend that you seek independent legal advice if you wish to pursue this course of action.
 
Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention.
 
Yours sincerely,
 
 
 
Amy Higginson
Lead Case Officer



Next »