Alan Dransfield's Blog

https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-adk-adk_sbnt&hsimp=yhs-adk_sbnt&hspart=adk&p=alan+dransfield+project+camelot#id=1&vid=1ffb7f05336433e169ded78555cb4f34&action=clickAlan
M Dransfield

Email sent – Sun 07/05/2017 05:51

To: Information Commissioner

Dear Madam

Christopher Graham (former Information Commissioner) is on record calling for a forensic inquiry into HS2; please see following URL link.

We now know the Tory Chairman, Sir Patrick McLoughlin, has sole primacy for the Freedom of Information Act, as
Chancellor to the Duchy of Lancaster.

What are you going to do
about this matter and what are you going to do about the fact the Tory
Chairman holds sole remit for the FOIA/ICO?

The situation at the ICO
is far worse than I had envisaged. The Tory Chairman can amend, distort and
renew section 45 of the said act on a whim.

You knew, or should have known, the ICO had lost their independence when Sir Patrick McLoughlin took over
the reins of the FOIA/ICO.

Yours in disgust

Dransfield

http://www.51m.co.uk/government-to-face-legal-challenge-from-information-commissioner-over-censorship-of-highly-critical-report-on-50billion-hs2-rail-project/

Vexatious to question London Legacy about a work-related death.

Email sent – Mon 17/04/2017 08:40

Information Commissioners Office

Dear Sirs

This is the first time in five years the Information Commissioner’s Office has reached a
correct, non-vexatious decision. I refer to the following ICO
decision which has refused a vexatious decision from Camden
Council. Oh my God, wonders will never cease.

In respect of this particular
Decision Notice, the ICO has been seen to doing the job properly and
professionally by overturning Camden CC vexatious decision.

Does this mean the ICO is now
prepared to hold a forensic investigation into the 6,000 wrongful vexatious
decisions based on the Dransfield GIA/3037/2011?

I wonder why the Information
Commissioner has suddenly decided to apply common law and common sense to this
Vexatious claptrap from the Camden Council.

Whilst this is a step in the right direction, it is too little
too late, as I will not change my mind that the ICO is rotten to the core ………

with thanks

Alan M Dransfield

https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2017/2013905/fer0637810.pdf

Email sent – 13/04/17

Scottish Government – James.White@gov.scot

Dear Mr White

..Breaking news that 70 + PFI schools were
damaged in the storm last year, nearly twice the number of reported damaged schools. Furthermore, the Scottish First Minister stated she
would ensure a full investigation into all PFI Projects in Scotland not
just schools. It would appear the Scottish First Minister is paying lip service
to these very serious issues.

The next letter I get from the Scottish Government, I would
like to see the First Minister’s signature on it please.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

FOIA Campaigner and Social Watchdog.

Email sent – 13/04/2017 11:53

Information Commissioner’s Office

Attn Elizabeth Denham

Dear Madam

I draw your attention to the following two(2) decision
notices, which are unlawful.

The first case is a complaint
brought against the Information Commissioner’s Office, in which the ICO has investigated against
themselves. This is not acceptable because the ICO lose their independence and
it is a gross conflict of interest. Any fair-minded person would agree that this
is not conducive to transparency and accountability.

I am not aware how many times this has happened, but I would
suggest you check your files and initiate a forensic inquiry into ICO v
ICO Decsion Notices. For sure, there are at least 1/2 Dransfield v ICO
decision notices. Being able to self-examine and self -investigate beggars belie,f but nothing surprises me anymore with the ICO. They
appear to be above the law. This may well be happening because of fiduciary failure in the chain of command right through to the Secretary of State, Karen Bradley, who is more than guilty of wilfull blindness.

The second case is related to
the Cabinet Office in which they have used the section 14/1
vexatious exemption. This decision is unlawful because you have failed to cite
the Court Precedent/Authority to the complainant. We must assume you were
relying upon the Dransfield vexatious hogwash Decision GIA
3037/2011, but you failed to include it in your Decision
Notice; hence, that DN is unlawful.

As you are aware, all my
correspondence to the ICO is being thrown straight into the bin or
at least not acknowledged.

It strikes me your Case
Management Team need further training into the FOIA 2000.

It is also very apparent that
the ICO is not double-checking their Decision Notices before publication. The
fact the ICO does not operate an ISO 9000 QA-QC is serious, which would
explain the root cause of such cock-ups.

I will take this opportunity to
report your Northern Ireland Representative Ken Macdonald who has failed to
respond to my FOIA requests against the HSE in Northern Ireland. At best,
the ICO both HQ and NI are treating me in a shabbily cavalier
manner, and at worst they are circumventing the FOIA 2000, section 77 in
particular, with an aim to pervert the course of Justice. I suggest the
latter.

I do believe the time has come for a forensic
investigation into the conduct of the ICO Management

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

FOIA Campaigner & Social Watchdog.

https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2017/2013864/fer0646554.pdf

“The term ‘vexatious’ is not defined in the legislation. In Information Commissioner vs Devon County Council & Dransfield1, the Upper Tribunal took the view that the ordinary dictionary definition of the word vexatious is only of limited use, because the question of whether a request is vexatious ultimately depends upon the circumstances surrounding that request. The Tribunal concluded that ‘vexatious’ could be defined as the “…manifestly unjustified, inappropriate or improper use of a formal procedure” (paragraph 27). The decision clearly establishes that the concepts of ‘proportionality’ and ‘justification’ are central to any consideration of whether a request is vexatious.”

Email sent – 29/03/2017 16:01

Dear Mr Bradshaw MP

In light of the breaking, alarming news about PFI
schools Health and Safety issues nationwide, I really do believe you
should call for a full H&S audit on the 6 Exeter PFI Schools.
Looking through some old records, I note all the Exeter PFI schools
Completion Certificates were signed 4 years ahead of the Fire
Certificates. In layman’s language this is the horse before the cart.

As I am sure you will
appreciate the Completion Certificate should not be approved and signed before the fire inspection has been carried out. Not rocket science, is it Mr
Bradshaw? It is most suspicious that the Exeter City Council claim
they inspected all 6 schools for fire certifcation on the 9th May 2011. It is
physically not possible to conduct a fire inspection on 6 large PFI Schools on
the same day. It should be noted also that the mechanical and electrical sub contractors works on the 6 PFI Exeter schools have admitted to
a number of fire hazards in a number of PFI Schools and hospitals nationwide……

It beggars belief that the Exeter City Council (Building
Controllers) would allow 6 PFI schools to operate without a Fire Certificate
for 4 years. Most Bizarre……

As you are aware, the Upper
Tribunal refused my FOIA hearing last year because they claim my request
was vexatious.

Operating 6 schools without
Fire Certificate is at best remiss and at worst criminally negligent; I
suggest the latter. I call upon my MP to seek an explanation why these
6 PFI schools were not certified for Fire protection some 4years + after the
Completion Certificates.

I would also ask my MP to write to the Upper Tribunal and
ICO and ask them to revisit their vexatious decisions because it would
appear Dransfield’s FOIA request is nowhere near vexatious. There
no doubt in my mind you will not take the needful action, but it will
suffice my records that I have made such a request.

Skeptics might say, there’s no big deal, no fires, no
deaths and no injuries. My brain doesn’t work like that; I want to know why the
Exeter City Council Chief Building Controller Mr Alan Stoke (retired) appears
to have lost his moral compass and allowed school to operate in a legal void for
over 4 years. The Upper Tribunal Judge Wikeley is on record that I was
abusing the FOIA system and manifestly unreasonable and that my request was
without serious purpose or public interest. My response to that is hogwash. If you had any backbone at all you would be kicking doors
down at the DCC and City Council asking for a full inquiry into this
Dransfield Vexatious bullsh*t. These Fire Certicates are further concrete
evidence that my original FOIA request was benign, straightforward and noth in the Public Interest and with serious purpose

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan m Dransfield