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.

Email to Michael Gove MP

Information Commissioner, Vexatious Posted on Wed, March 18, 2020 08:34:33

Parliamentary Select Committee for the Department of Digital,Sport Culture etc.
12/03/2020 09:30

Dear Sirs

I wish to alert her Parliamentary Select Committee that the Information Commissioner’s Office has been operating in a legal void for over a decade. In particular,I wish to draw your attention to the following facts

1. The ICO do not recognize the ISO 9000 series for QA/QC.

2. The ICO do not recognize the ISO 14000 series for Environment Protection.

3.The ICO have been using an unlawful Court Precedent from the Court of Appeal EWCA Civ 454 15th May 2015 Dransfield v ICO. Thousands of FOIA  requests have been denied under the Dransfield Vexatious Exemption. Perusal of the Court of Appeal will support my claims that the CoA decision was reached via a corrupt mindset, please see para 68. Moreover the three CoA Judges made NEW LAW. Judges apply the law,they don’t make new laws.

The ICO decision database will shows thousands of vexatious decisions have been made by the ICO and they are acting in concert  with the Government to pervert the course of justice. 

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield



ICO Data Protection Breach.

Information Commissioner, Vexatious Posted on Wed, March 18, 2020 08:30:05

Email sent to grc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
12/03/2020 16:41

First Tier Tribunal

Dear Sirs

I wish to seek legal redress against the ICO, whom, have breached my data and human rights under the GDPR 2018. My name, Alan Dransfield  which has been unlawfully published in the ICO decision notice 25 times.  The ICO never publish the name of the complainant and they know or should know they should not publish my name either.

I call upon the GRC to instruct the ICO to remove my name from their database and I do also believe the GRC can enforce a compensation figure  for the unlawful  publishingof  my name. I also ask the GRC to find the ICO in contempt of Court. I really do not believe it is necessary for me to submit an application form to the GRC as the following ICO holds compelling evidence that the ICO have breached the GDPR.

with thanks

Yours  sincerely 

Alan M Dransfield

FOIA and Social Watchdog.

https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2019/2615092/fs50802258.pdf



Sent to various Data Breach lawyers.

Information Commissioner, Vexatious Posted on Wed, March 18, 2020 08:24:08

Dear Sirs
I believe my data protection rights have been breached by the ICO. In particular, they published my full name in one of their Decision Notices 25 times, the ICO ref # FS 50802258 dated 6/6/2019. I was not informed they would publish my name and I did not give them permission to do so.
My name has also been published in ICO Decision Notices (DN) guidelines, public documents etc over 10,000 times since I became the Vexatious Court Precedent in Jan 2013 via the Upper Tribunal GIA/3037/2011 which was upheld by the Court of Appeal EWCA Viv 454 May 2015.


I also believe the Cabinet Office via their Brexit Dept DExEU have breached my Data right for publishing my name on line as an integral part of their Brexit debates.


One major foundation stone of the FOIA 2000 is that it must be the FOIA request NOT the requester which must be classified as VEXATIOUS, thus there is no legal requirement to have my good family name published 25 times in one single ICO Decision Notice.

Ignorance of the law cannot be used in defence of a legal argument. I maintain my data breach is driven by the ICO egregious conduct and maladministration by the ICO.


My understanding of the GDPR 2018 is my name Alan M Dransfield is classed as my data and should not be used by the ICO in their decision notices. In the event you would concur with my prognosis, I would instruct you to seek compensation from the ICO and the Government. I would suggest/recommend that the ICO pay me £10 pounds for every time they have used my F

family name in pursuit of their FOIA/EIR/DATA . I would estimate the Dransfield name has been unlawfully used by the ICO approx 250,000 times give or take 10K. You may well wish to seek a higher compensation benchmark, that’s down to you.

I would also ask your law company to investigate libel and defamation of my good family name when my name has been unlawfully published. Prior to the ICO allegations, my character was impeccable. Hence the ICO allegations against me have had a devastating effect on me and my family and friends.

I understand the terms of your legal advice would be no win no fee situation.
As this email mentions ICO and Elizabeth Denham in person, I consider it prudent to cc the ICO in my mailing list.I look forward to your response.
With thanks
Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

FOIA Campaigner and Social Watchdog



Questions about a death in police custody – vexatious.

Information Commissioner, Uncategorised Posted on Mon, March 02, 2020 19:47:22

https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2020/2616939/fs50877467.pdf



Julian Assange -questions are vexatious.

Uncategorised Posted on Sun, February 23, 2020 17:08:11

Paragraph 83:

  1. “The term “vexatious” is not defined in the FOIA. The Upper Tribunal (UT) considered the issue of vexatious requests in the Information Commissioner v Devon CC & Dransfield (UKUT 440 (AAC), 28 January 2013).1 The UT commented that “vexatious” could be defined as the “manifestly unjustified, inappropriate or improper use of a formal procedure”. This definition clearly establishes that the concepts of proportionality and justification are relevant to any consideration of whether a request is vexatious. “


Another iffy decision from Denham

Uncategorised Posted on Mon, February 10, 2020 16:37:50

https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2020/2616939/fs50877467.pdf



ROBERT A PICKTHALL (RAB) DEATH- CORONER’S INQUIRY

Robert Pickthall RIP Posted on Mon, January 06, 2020 19:29:18

Fri 03/01/2020 22:29

To: Peter.Sigee@judicary.net

Dear Sir

I am deeply concerned that you intend to conclude the Coroner’s Inquiry on the subject title next Monday 6th Jan. You may or you may not be aware that I have an open complaint of egregious conduct and maladministration by Mr Paul Crowther  the British Transport Police (BTP) Chief Constable. There is demonstrable evidence that the BTP have failed to follow their own Policy and Procedures eg witness statements not signed, earliest witness statement two week post death.

Mr Ian Henderson (IH) Officer in Charger (OIC) has adopted a cavalier attitude to an open and shut case of suicide. I was friend of RAB and I do not believe that he committed suicide and the BTC advised me at the offset, I was an interested party and I would be kept updated. I have received no update and as far as I am concerned my claim of egregious conduct and maladministration stands. There appears to be a myriad of  irregularities and anomalies with the BTP case management i.e., imposter as next of kin, removal of RAB’s life savings from the Bank 24 hrs after RAB’s death, the Genuine NOK Zelda Davies was rejected.  Text Messages from RAB’s Phone 10 mins before his death whilst his phone was known to be in RAB’s house. I have been following this case closely and it would appear to me the BTP are akin to the Pink Panther or Carry on up the Copper. Some 5 months post death and not a pip squeak from the BTP. I was planning to write to you post Coroners Decision. An integral part of the Coroners decision is to learn lessons to avoid suicides, and I would expect the coroner to condemn the Cheshire &Chester Council (CWCC)whose actions and inactions have driven RAB to his death, if indeed it was a suicide, because in essence the egress conduct and maladministration by the harassment and false witness  claiming RAB had submitted thousands of abusive  emails to CWCC officials, which couldn’t be further from the truth. The ICO instructed the CWCC to release personal data at the beginning of July 2019 but instead of releasing RAB personal data they commenced a High Court Custodial sentence of RAB. They knew or should have known this was in contempt of Court. I state categorically  that if CWCC had obeyed the ICO order to release RAB’s personal data he would be alive today. This is something that I hope you can share with your fellow coroners nationwide as a lesson learned. 

With thanks

Yours sincerely 

Alan M Dransfield

FOIA Campaigner and Social Watchdog



Mr Sowerbutts, what are you up to?

Vexatious Posted on Mon, January 06, 2020 19:21:55

To: grc@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

c.c Elizabeth Denham, Richard Bailey

Sun 05/01/2020 13:07

First Tier Tribunal

Dear Sirs

Polite follow up please to subject title as I am awaiting leave to appeal from the FTT to the UT.

As you are aware I am on record claiming egregious conduct maladministration  by the FTT  Registrar in this case. I would like to remind you that the ICO are applying a blanket vexatious exemption on ALL my requests. They are on record from their Mr Adam Sowerbutts that ALL my FOIA requests  will  be treated under section 14/1 and sect 50(2)(c) whatever the subject which is a major breach if my civil, legal and human rights and the FOI 2000

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

FOIA Campaigner and Social Watchdog



Next »