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.

Sent to various Data Breach lawyers.

Information Commissioner, Vexatious Posted by Sheila OliverPosted 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 by Sheila OliverPosted on Mon, March 02, 2020 19:47:22

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



Upper Tier Tribunal decides questions about Lockerbie are “vexatious”.

Information Commissioner, Vexatious Posted by Sheila OliverPosted on Sat, December 14, 2019 08:09:05
Llockerbie-UT-decisionDownload


ICO doesn’t keep a disclosure log (sigh)

Information Commissioner Posted by Sheila OliverPosted 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 by Sheila OliverPosted 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



Imminent changes to vexatious exemptions?

Information Commissioner, Vexatious Posted by Sheila OliverPosted 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 by Sheila OliverPosted 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 by Sheila OliverPosted on Sun, October 27, 2019 07:57:00

https://legaldictionary.net/egregious/



« PreviousNext »