Alan Dransfield's Blog

Email sent – 23 March 2015 04:49

Information Commissioner Office

Dear Sirs

Under protection of the FOIA 2000, please provide me the following
information ref Debit/Credit Cards held at the ICO:-

1. How many ICO officials have Debit/Credit Cards?

2. Who authorises the use of issuance of Debit/Credit Cards?

3. Please provide me with copies of bank Statements for the last two years on
every ICO card holder.

4. Who scrutinises and approves Debit/Credit Card use at the Information Commissioner’s Ooffice?

Owing to the recent breaking news ref fraud and theft of public funds by
the unlawful use of Debit /Credit Cards by public authorities nationwide, this request is in
the public interest.

This is a brand new request.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield.

Email sent – 23 March 2015 05:37

Justice Select Committee

Dear Sirs

Please see the attached Information Commissioner’s Office decision FS 50568146 dated 15/3/2015. This ICO
decision is tangible evidence that the ICO is not independent as they
claim.

Whilst the Complainant to this decision is not named,i t is public knowledge
that the Complainant was employees of the ICO; hence, how can the ICO remain
independent when they investigate complaints about themselves made by
themselves?

Moreover and more importantly, there is a huge public interest in this
particular case. Hence, the ICO weas wrong to refuse the FOIA request from its
own employees.

For your information, action and files

Alan M Dransfield

Email sent – 20 March 2015 04:32

Justice Select Committee

Dear Sirs

I wish to present further tangible evidence of wrongdoing by the Information Commissioner’s Office via their illegal use of section 14(1) vexatious
exemption.

Please see the attached ICO decision dated 11th Mar 2015 ref Fowery Parish
Council and in particular para 17 which relies on the Dransfield Case
GIA/3037/2011.

The ICO appear to have turned a blind eye to the fact that the Public
Authority changed its plea mid-stream.

For your information, action and files.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield.

Email sent – March 20, 2015 8:56 AM

ICO

Dear Sirs

Under protection of the FOIA 2000 please provide me with a PDF copy of the
Metadata and in particular a copy of all internal and external emails containing
my name between 2005 and Feb 2015.

This should not be confused with a DPA 98 request as I am not seeking data
about myself.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

Email sent – 02 March 2015 06:37

Dear Mr Bradshaw

Please see the following article which confirms that private contractors working on Public Works contracts shall not be included under the FOIA 2000.

And where have the Shadow Government been all this time. Surely not sleeping on the job again.

It is necessary and vital to included PA contractors within the remit of the FOIA, for example the PFI & PPP nationwide contracts alone are in the region of £200 billion. Moreover and more importantly, this figure is not included in the National Debt.

The coalition and your mob are always banging the drum ref transparency, accountability and security (TAS), which is a joke. TAS must be seen to be working; if it ain’t seen to be working, in all probability it ain’t working.

The PFI schools project in Exeter is worth £600 million and there is zilch TAS. Hang your head in shame Mr Bradshaw. No wonder Devon County Council is spending thousands of pounds defending their Dransfield Vexatious decisions and have slapped a lifetime email ban against me.

Polite reminder for you to reconsider your ban against me attending your Friday night surgery.

Yours in disgust

Dransfield

http://www.foi.directory/featured/simon-hughes-regret-that-foi-code-will-not-be-updated-to-include-private-contractors/

Email sent –

Dear Mr Bradshaw

Please see the ICO article and I draw your attention to Christopher Graham’s recent ref “SAVING TO THE PUBLIC PURSE”.

My response to that is hogwash. If the ICO is so concerned about the public purse costs, why the hell is he spending thousands of pounds fighting the Dransfield FOI cases?

He also goes on to state: “the need to shine the light of transparency in the deepest corners” or some other twaddle.

As far as I am concerned there is no transparency, accountability or security (TAS) at the ICO as they were switched off by the Wikely Vexatious Decision ref GIA/3037/2011 Dransfield v ICO.

As reported earlier to your office, the ICO is in meltdown and are in the Last Chance Saloon. Ditto for the DCC and the FOIA 2000.

In a nutshell, Mr Bradshaw, if I lose my Court of Appeal case public authorities nationwide will hand down vexatious decisions on a whim, which in essence are GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARDS and Joe Public will be gagged forever. On the other hand if I win my Court of Appeal Case, I will become the saviour of the FOIA 2000. Obviously I prefer the latter to happen. Maybe you can recommend me for a Knighthood.

Where have you been whilst all these shannagins have been going on? Surely not sleeping on the job again.

New bulbs for transparency for your office.

For your information, action and files

Alan M Dranfield.

http://www.pdpjournals.com/images/stories/back_issues/freedom_of_information_11_3.pdf

Email sent – 03 March 2015 04:24
Dear Mr Bradshaw

You will recall that I wrote to you on this subject 6 months ago and you chose to ignore my allegations.

Please see the following article from a devout Information Commissioner’s Office fan, Mr Timothy Turner, who now accuses the ICO of wrongdoing.

Of course, the ICO are perverting the course of justice via section 77 of the FOIA 2000 and a simple ocular inspection of the ICO vexatious decisions passed down on a whim since Jan 13 is proof of the pudding.

Are those cracks appearing in the dam? You might have to stick your finger in there Mr Bradshaw.

What’s that noise I hear, chickens coming home to roost.

Yours setc

Dransfield

http://2040infolawblog.com/2015/03/02/who-watches-the-watchdog

Email sent – Thursday, January 29, 2015 4:25 AM

Dear Mr Bradshaw MP

I would hazard a guess the Court of Appeal hearing over 2 days in
London has cost the public purse £50k. This cost could have been avoided
if Devon County Council had given me the sought after information which I asked for under the
Freedom of Information Act 2000.

I would also hazard a guess it would have cost the DCC £5 or less
to provide me with public data.

We must learn lessons from these court cases and the DCC appear to be oblivious to the public purse costs in pursuing
Vexatious Exemptions.

For your information action and files.

Alan M Dransfield