Alan Dransfield's Blog

Sent: 28 February 2014 11:34
To: Sheila
Oliver
Subject: UNCLASSIFIED: RE: FOIA
request

Dear
Ms Oliver

Information
Request Ref: 04706

Complaints
Reference: CS782764

I write in
reference to your Internal Review request to Devon County Council made on
14th February 2014 concerning the Council’s response to your Freedom
of Information Request (Ref: 04706). Having reviewed this email from you I note
you are not satisfied with the response provided to your request. Given that
the Council’s response has stated that the documents you have requested is
exempt from disclosure under Section 43(2) of the Freedom of Information Act
(the Act), I have made this the point of my investigation.

Please note
that I have now considered the Council’s response to your request again and can
confirm that I uphold the original decision to withhold these documents on the
grounds that the information is exempt by virtue of Section 43(2) of the Act
2000 and the public interest test weighs in favour of withholding the
information for the reasons previously explained to you. I will outline my
reasons for this below.

By way of
explanation please note that Devon County Council’s Information Governance Team
have recently established a trading arm to explore ways of generating income to
help address recent budget cuts imposed by central government. Trading activity
from this service includes the sale of advice, training, policies, guidance, and
other bespoke products.

Whilst at
present the Council has not made its Freedom of Information Request Handling
Policy & Procedure available for sale, it is our intention to do so in the
near future. It is therefore our view that releasing these documents into the
public domain is likely to have the effect of diminishing the number of sales of
these documents. This in turn is likely to prejudice our commercial interests
through reducing the size for the market for these documents therefore leading
to reduced revenue generation for the Council.

Although the
Council considers that our Freedom of Information Request Handling Policy and
Procedure are exempt from disclosure, we wish to be as open and transparent as
possible and therefore to assist your understanding of how requests are handled
by the Council, I have summarised our Request Handling Procedure
below.

Request for
information is received by the Council and where necessary forwarded to the
Information Governance team

All requests
are recorded and acknowledged within 2 days

Requests are
then sent to the relevant service who will nominate an appropriate officer to
work with a Disclosure Officer from the Information Governance Team to gather
all the necessary information to compile a response

Information
from the relevant service is then sent back to the Information Governance Team
where a Disclosure Officer will compile a response and will apply any relevant
exemptions

The relevant
Disclosure Officer will then seek any necessary sign off required and will then
issue a formal response to the applicant in line with the requirements of the
relevant legislation

With regard to
the Council’s Freedom of Information Request Handling Policy, please note that
this document simply reaffirms the Council’s obligations in respect of the
Environmental Information Regulations & Freedom of Information Act
legislation and associated codes of practice. We feel that given requests under
this legislation are governed by statute, there would be little that disclosure
of this document would do to further the public’s understanding of how requests
under this legislation are managed by the Council. However to assist your
understanding of the contents of this document, I have attached a copy of the
introduction and contents page of this policy which I you will find
useful.

I hope this
information is of assistance to you, however, if you remain dissatisfied how the
Council has responded to your request, you are entitled to ask for your
complaint to be escalated to Stage 2 in our Corporate Feedback Process, for a
further review. Should you wish to do so, please email customer.relations@devon.gov.uk
or write to Customer Relations Team, County Hall, Room 120, Topsham Road,
Exeter, EX2 4QD.

Email sent – Sunday, February 02, 2014 4:00 AM

FISCAL AND AUDIT IRREGULARITIES AT DEVON COUNTY COUNCIL. GIA/3037/2011/&
EA/2010/0152.

Dear Sir/Madam,

This letter comes to the DCC Financial Secretary via the DCC Chairman
Councillor Bernard Hughes owing to my lifetime email ban by the DCC.

Under the ACA 1998, section 14.15.16, I wish to ask questions about the
audit reports for the last five years. In particular the DCC audit reports do
not include the DCC Costings of the PFI Schools and they do not include the legal costs of the DCC FOIA Department and in particular a 6 figure sum costs
for the DCC defence of several FOIA disputes between the DCC and Alan M
Dransfield. The legal costs incurred to the DCC must be £100K plus over the
last 5 years.

Moreover and more importantly, the DCC Auditors have not recognised that the
DCC have failed to implement or approve an Asset Management Plan (AMP ) for any
of the the 6 PFI schools. In the event the AMP has not been approved, it would
automatically follow that any subsequent audit of the DCC books would be a sham,
a.k.a. AUDIT FRAUD..

In actual fact, last years audit report clearly states that the DCC
“DERECOGNISE” the Exeter Schools Finances.

Could this be the underlying reason the West Exe College Headmaster was
able to write his own Salary Cheques for the last 5/6 years?

It would therefore appear to me that the DCC Auditors have failed their
duty of Care to audit the DCC Books with particular emphasis on the Local
Education Department and the DCC Legal Department.

I do not accept that the DCC can spend thousands of pounds fighting FOIA
Cases, when it would be far cheaper to hand over the sought after
information.

In the first instance, I would like to make an appointment to visit the DCC
Offices with a view to examining your fiscal records please.

Please also consider this letter as a FOIA request for the DCC to provide
a complete breakdown of the legal costs incurred to date on

1. GIA/3037/2011 currently before the Court of Appeal.

2. EA//2010/0152 currently before the FTT 6th retrial.

Cost breakdown to include:-

A. All Legal Costs

B..All travel and accommodation Costs.

C. All costs incurred to date on Steve Sitch’s Employment Tribunal Costs
and final settlement.

D. All costs incurred to the Richard Buzzacott’s Resignation
Settlement.

E. Final Compensation Package for the former CEO Mr Philip Norrey..

There are similarities to be drawn here with the fiscal irregularities at
the Carmarthen County Council currently in the national spotlight.

For your information, action and files

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

To: GRC@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

Cc: Richard Bailey ; aacpresidentpa@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
; Mark Thorogood

Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 8:59
AM

Subject: DEVON COUNTY COUNCIL DO NOT HAVE A
FOIA POLICY/ EA/2013/0152

First Tier Tribunal

I am somewhat concerned that the Devon County Council does not have an approved FOIA Policy
and Procedure for the FOIA 2000.

This can be verified by a simple ocular inspection of their website where
you will find some reference to FOIA, eg Disclosure Log, complaints etc but there
is NO approved Policy and Procedures for the FOIA Access to Information and
Data..

For example of good law, please the attached Cheshire NHS FOI Policy
and the DCC have no such policy.

Such Policy and Procedures for the FOIA 2000 are a legal obligation.

No wonder the DCC are making so many FOIA mistakes, which is costing the local taxpayers thousands of pounds.

The DCC have a legal obligation to hold an approved FOI policy and
procedures.

If what I say is correct, it would automatically follow that DCC auditors
are not doing their job properly and it would mean the ICO are failing their monitoring duties.

You might find it helpful for the FTT panel to request a copy of the DCC
P&P for the FOIA 2000?

It beggars belief the DCC do not have a FOIA Policy.

For your information action and files

With thanks

Alan M Dransfield

NB Ben Bradshaw MP for Exeter

This is further evidence of criminal negligence by the DCC.

Attn of the HR Manger

Dear Sir/Madam

Ref Official Complaints against DCC Staff

I wish to make a formal complaint against the following members of the DCC Staff, whom I consider have failed their due diligence to protect members of the public regarding health and safety issues at various locations.

They are:

1. Mrs Margaret Bulluck. Health and Safety Manager

2. Mr Martin Lawrence. FOI Official.

I would also add that Mr Lawrence has knowingly and wilfully breached section 77 of the FOIA 2000.

3. Miss Amber Steer Frost. FOIA Manager.

I would also add she has committed wilfull perjury during her evidence to HM Courts. Ditto for section 77.

4. Miss Jan Shadbolt, Legal Director for the DCC.

Miss Shadbolt has wilfully turned a blind eye to serious breaches of the FOIA 2000 and has actively encouraged her staff to misuse and abuse the FOIA 2000 in a deliberate attempt to pervert the Course of Justice.

My allegations of Section 77 breaches can be verified by a simple 5 minute ocular inspection of the Rugby Bridge or perusal of the Operation Maintenance Manua(OMM) for the Rugby Bridge. The OMM hold irrefutable evidence of serious breaches of Section 77 of the FOIA 2000.

In reference to Mrs Bullock, I refer to her letter dated 5th June which contains false and misleading information and I will respond to them in the same numerical order as her letter.

1. Great Moor House (GMH) Lightning Protection System.

She claims the GMH is compliant to BS-EN 62305 standards but is unable to prove that by producing the Lightning Risk Assessment. Hence, I am expected to take her word for the full compliance.

2. Newton Abbott Town Bridge.

She claims the bridge is fully compliant and has a commissioning certificate. However, I have just obtained the Lightning Risk Assessment for this Bridge which proves conclusively the Bridge is NOT compliant to BS-EN 62305.

I am somewhat concerned about her last statement in item #2,”I cannot comment on to why you could not see the LPS system here or in many other buildings, other than to confirm that many modern LPS systems are located within as opposed to outside of the structure”

When she refer to within, I can only assume she mean the cavity of the building, which is perfectly acceptable, but the ground rod and test points are never on the inside of a Building.

No wonder the LPS on DCC Properties are non- compliant if you have a H&S Manager who appears to be woefully ignorant of Lightning Protection Standards.

3. Haven Banks Outdoor Center.

Mrs Bullock maintains this new building is fully compliant to BS-EN 62305 but again has failed to produce any such documents. At best this is lie and at worst it is part of a wider conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.

She also claims the Centre is compliant to Leptospirosis (Weils Desease) but again has failed to produce a copy of the Risk Assessment.

I do state categorically that the new climbing tower is non/compliant to the BS-EN 62035/2008 and therefore should NOT be used in the event of a thunderstorm.

4. PFI School.
Mrs Bullock once again fails to provide any clear statements or written documents that the contamination drinking water problems have been resolved. She has also failed her due diligence to investigate my claims these 6 PFI schools are unsafe and unfit for purpose by suggesting I contact the owners of the school, i.e Modern Schools.

5. Sandy Park Bridge.
Mrs Bullock is aware this bridge has been unsafe and unfit for purpose since 2006 and she is aware the bridge has been devoid of any Lightning Protection System since 2006 but has failed to take any immediate action.

6. County Hall Lightning Protection System.
Mrs Bullock claims the DCC HQ is fully compliant with BS-EN 62305-2008 but has once again failed to produce a copy of the Lightning Risk Assessment for this building. She also claims the DCC HQ is subject to further LPS installations which would support my claims it is non-compliant.

7. Witholding Information
Mrs Bullock is fully aware that her colleagues at the DCC FOIA Office are wilfully and maliciously breaching section 77 of the FOIA Act.

8. Request for a further meeting.
Mrs Bullock has refused another meeting with me, which suggests to me she is hiding something.

9. Professional Standards.
Mrs Bullock claims she has provided me with the necessary information, hence the formal complaint process has not been triggered. I do not accept any such statement and Mrs Bullock is offering me her comments and opinions only; she has failed to produce a single document.

Not only is Mrs Bullock failing her due diligence duties on such matters, she is is giving me lip service on Health and Safety issues.

In accordance with DCC Policies and Procedures for making Due Diligence complaints, I look forward to hearing from the HR Manager.

Nothwithstanding the veracity of my complaints, I believe the gravity of my assertions behoves your office to trigger an immediate suspensions of these four staff members, subject to an internal inquiry.

Failure to suspend these DCC Officers will reflect badly upon the transparency, accountability and security, which is clearly not seen to be working at this juncture.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

POLICY CHANGE AT THE DEVON COUNTY COUNCIL REF FOIA REQUESTS.

There appears to be a policy change at the DCC ref my FOIA requests. Please go to the whatdotheyknow website and search for the Devon County Council and you will find the DCC review response to my FOIA (New Incinerator) dated 17th May ref#03290.

My original FOIA was refused under section 14(1) VEXATIOUS grounds, but that was overturned on appeal from me. Whether or not this policy change has been brought about by my constant battles with the DCC FOIA Team or whether they are being “leaned upon” by a higher authority I know not, but I welcome the obvious policy change.

The DCC stated they overturned their original vexatious decision because the New Incinerator request was a new benign request, which is 110% correct for them to do and to release the sought after data which they have done to a large degree but not yet 100% complete.

Based on this theory of NEW and BENIGN FOIA requests, it behoves the DCC to revisit ALL my FOIA requests.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/6733211.stm

What is going on at Devon County Council? Are these fit people to hold public office?

Please see this ‘Not Me Guv’ letter from John Hart, Leader of Devon County Council.