Complaint against Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council

tags:

Posted by ChrisCorbin on 18 Aug 2010

Legal basis

UK Freedom of Information Act 2000 (Section 50)

UK Environmental Information Regulations 2004

Key dates of the case

5 February 2010 The Complainant requested information required to complete a compliant CON29R.

15 February 2010 The Council wrote to the Complainant and stated that some CON29R information could be inspected free of charge and for the remainder a charge of £4.46 would be made.

1 March 2010 The Complainant requested an internal review of this decision.

11 March 2010 The Council wrote to the complainant and reiterated that the complainant would have to pay the set fees in order to access the requested information. It also explained that as it viewed the matter as a “legal issue, revolving around a difference of opinion”, it did not intend to review its previous decision.

16 March 2010 The Complainant refers the complaint to the Information Commissioners Office.

9 April 2010 The Information Commissioners Office wrote to the Council. The Council was asked to provide an internal review decision considering the request under EIR to the complainant by 7 May 2010 and forward a copy of this to the Commissioner.

9 April 2010 The Council acknowledged receipt of the Information Commissioners Office letter.

9 April 2010 The Information Commissioners Office telephoned the Council in order to acquire more information about the nature and format of the withheld information.

6 May 2010 The Council provided its internal review outcome to the complainant.

2 June 2010 The Information Commissioners Office wrote to the Council setting out his initial view that as the information should be considered for disclosure under the EIR, he was unlikely to uphold charges calculated in line with other pieces of legislation. The Commissioner invited any further response the Council might wish to make.

3 June 2010 The Council acknowledged receipt of the Information Commissioners letter and stated that the Council would respond.

3 June 2010 The Information Commissioners Office wrote to the Council asking whether the Council held the information requested by the Complainant.

3 June 2010 The Council acknowledged the Information Commissioners Office request and provided the information to the Commissioner.

5 July 2010 The Council submitted to the Information Commissioners Office a detail submission setting out the Councils position.

12 July 2010 The Information Commissioners Office wrote to the Council seeking further information arising from the Council’s submission.

13 July 2010 The Council responded to the Information Commissioners Office and provided the information requested.

30 July 2010 The Information Commissioners Office wrote to the Council and asked that it reconsider the complainant’s request to inspect the Local Land Charges Register in light of the new Local Land Charges (Amendment) Rules 2010. These revoke the set fee of £22 levied for personal searches of the local land charges register. The amendment was published on 29 July 2010 and comes into force on 17 August 2010.

2 August 2010 The Council confirmed to the Information Commissioners Office that it had stopped levying charges.

9 August 2010 The Information Commissioner issues the Decision notice.

20 August 2010 The Information Commissioners Office publishes the Decision notice.

Elapsed time = 185 days

Outline of Case

Summary (Copied from the Decision Notice Reference: FER0302281. Date: 9 August 2010)

The complainant submitted a request to Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council (‘the Council’) for information from environmental records held on a property in Basingstoke. The complainant specified that he wished to view the records in person. The Council agreed to provide some of the information requested but only on the provision of a set fee, and refused to provide other parts of the information requested. The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council failed to comply with regulation 5(1) as it failed to make information available on request and regulation 5(2) as it failed to make it available within the statutory time for compliance. The Commissioner found that the Council breached regulation 6(1) as it refused to comply with the complainant’s request to receive information in a particular format. In addition, the Council has breached regulation 11(4) by failing to provide the outcome of its internal review within 40 working days. The Commissioner requires the Council to make the requested information available for the complainant to inspect within 35 days of this notice.

Case Notes

Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council

Information Commissioners Office

Reference:

Complaint against Chichester District Council

Complaint against City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council

Complaint against East Riding of Yorkshire Council

Complaint against Kirklees Council

Complaint against Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council

Complaint against Liverpool City Council

Complaint against Maldon District Council

Complaint against Stoke City Council