Alan Dransfield's Blog

Letter sent 4th August 2013

Attn of the Board of Directors and the Non-Executive Board of Directors

Christopher Graham. Information Commissioner.
Simlon Entwiste
Daniel Bejamin
David Smith
Graham Smith
Andrew Hind
Neil Mason
Jane May
Enid Rowlands

Ladies and Gentlemen

FOIA IRREGULRITIES & ANOMALIES AT THE ICO

I wish to draw your attention to a serious matter which involves a small minority of people at the ICO who, in my opinion, are bringing the good name of the ICO into disrepute.

In particular, I refer to GIA/3037/2011 and EA 2010/0152 – the former is currently at Court of Appeal and the latter is at Upper Tribunal Appeal.

These are not isolated cases of ICO Shannagins and conspiracies.

There is prima facie evidence on the ICO records that ICO Officials have acted in bad faith with their actions and inactions.

Firstly, the ICO know or should have known that GIA/3037/2011 is still a live case before the Court of Appeal. Hence, they should not publish any documents or discuss this case in public. The ICO have failed on this Court requirement and hence are in contempt of Court.

I am aware of at least 3 occasions where my case has been discussed in public:-

The ICO vexatious 37 page guidance dated May 2013.

By the Deputy Commissioner Mr Graham Smith on TV.

By Lord McNally in the House of Lords.

There is also evidence that the ICO have spent thousands of pounds of taxpayers, money on GIA/3037/2011, which should have not been investigated by the ICO in the first place because it did not meet the ICO criteria for investigation, i.e. the PA did not own the subject title of the sought after information.

The ICO have consistently and wilfully breached their own Policy and Procedures for vexatious decisions……

There is also consistent evidence that ICO officials have wilfully breached section 77 of the FOIA 2000.

There is also evidence in the public domain that the Devon County Council have consistently and wilfully compromised the FOIA 2000 in relation to section 77 and evidence that the ICO have turned a blind eye. In particular, I ref to the whatdotheyknow website.

I fervently do believe that the ICO have “thrown the kitchen sink” at my FOIA GIA/3037/2011 with the sole intent to protect vexatious decisions handed down by rogue public authorities such as Devon County Council, Stockport Borough Council, Camarthen County Council and no doubt dozens of other rogue public authorities….

There is clear evidence that transparency, accountability and security (TAS) is NOT(repeat not) seen to be working at the ICO.

If my allegations are correct, of which I hold no doubt whatsoever, it would automatically follow that the ICO Board of Governors and the Non-Exeutive Board have failed their duty of care.

For you information, action and files

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

Sent August 3rd 2013

The Rt Hon Tom McNally
Minister of Justice
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ

Dear Lord McNally

I have recently found your letter to the Voice of Local Media (attached) in which you claim the FOI have sorted out the “VEXATIOUS ISSUES” in a recent FOI Case. You did not, however, give specific case details, but I can only assume you are making reference to my own case i.e., Alan M Dransfield v ICO and the Devon County Council GIA/3037/2011.

I say “assume” with confidence because I have seen actual reference you made to the House of Lords in June this year and you also go on to say the ICO New Guidance will assist transparency.

Oh, what a web we weave when we set out to deceive, Lord McNally, and as Minister for Justice I would have expected you to be conscious of the fact that live legal cases should not be discussed in public, but you have chosen to ignore that sub judice requirement, ditto for the ICO with regard to their publication of the 37 page Vexatious Guidance and the appearance on national TV by the Deputy Commissioner, Graham Smith, quoting the Dransfield Case.

I will remind you that the GIA/3037/2011 Alan M Dransfield V ICO and Devon County Council is still an active case before the Court of Appeal and in line with HM Court Procedures, I do not intend to make further comments on that case.

However, I can make comment on the ICO 37 page document and I intend to keep it short. At best, it is a tool designed to assist the passage of fraud and at worst it has been designed to assist certain rogue Government officials to pervert the course of justice and I suggest the latter.

Your own personal FOIA experience can be written on the back of a postage stamp and in particular, I refer to your FOIA attempt to Network Rail.

The FOIA is being willfuly undermined by the oversight authorities who are paid to protect it i.e., the ICO and HM Upper Tribunal Judges.

I am sure you will hear a lot more about the Dransfield v ICO and Devon County Council (DCC) in coming months.

I would strongly recommend that you call for an immediate Public Inquiry into the Dransfield v ICO FOIA case and enquiry into the conduct of the ICO and HM Judges and the Upper Tribunal President Mr Justice Charles.

I fervently believe transparency, accountability and security (TAS) MUST been seen to be working and in the event it is not seen to be working, then in all probability it aint’ working.

From my vantage point, Lord McNally, TAS is not seen to be working in your department at the ICO/FOIA Department.

with thanks

Alan M Dransfield

Lord McNally, LibDem Peer, states his commitment to transparency and the Freedom of Information Act. We shall see!