FOI Requests

[mikeymack2002]

Your individual theory should be addressed to the relevant authorities.

 

There are simply hundreds of FOI requests presented to local authorities on this subject (many from the same person using a variety of different aliases) and just a fraction of them appear on the WhatdoTheyKnow website. We have all seen many responses from the local authorities confirming that 'direct payments' are dealt with in accordance with the regulations and in this 'Information thread' I have highlighted the view according to the bailiff industry and this is very important indeed to debtors.

 

 

I don't mean to doubt you but please for the forum state where this information is fact, so we can see where your allegation has come from? Hearsay is inadmissible. So would you be so kind as to provide a positive link to this information? Or provide confirmation from each relevant Authority that can prove that these FoI were from the same person. A pdf from those Councils should show the forum that this is indeed correct....

[ploddertom]

I don't mean to doubt you but please for the forum state where this information is fact, so we can see where your allegation has come from? Hearsay is inadmissible. So would you be so kind as to provide a positive link to this information? Or provide confirmation from each relevant Authority that can prove that these FoI were from the same person. A pdf from those Councils should show the forum that this is indeed correct....

 

All you need to do is go to the What Do they Know website & do some basic searching to come up with names like:

Neil Gilliatt, Enid Brighton, Paul Smith, Arnold Layne + others

 

1 response from Haringey went on to say the following:

"

From: FOI

Haringey Borough Council

17 February 2015

 

Dear Mr Layne,

 

 

 

Further to my comments of 14 January,

 

“As we have no Haringey council tax payer called Mr Arnold Layne, we

believe you may be using a false name in your correspondence with us. We

believe that you may also be acting alongside or be using the name “Ms

Enid Brighton” who also posts FOI requests via the What Do They Know

website on a similar theme.”

 

 

 

Could you please provide some form of identification to confirm that your

name is Arnold Layne? Such as:

 

 

 

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

|Proof of Identity |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current valid (signed) full UK Passport |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current valid (signed) overseas Passport |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current valid EEA Member State ID card |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current Residency Permit issued by Home Office |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current Full UK Driving Licence |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current UK/EU Photocard Driving Licence |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current State Pension book/notification letter |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current Benefits Agency Book/letter |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current years Inland Revenue Tax Code Notification |

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

 

 

 

Regards,

 

xxx xxxx

 

Feedback Team Leader"

[mikeymack2002]

No disrespect meant here but looking at that site yes there are many FoI requests but few claiming to be to the same person, what would be of interest though is for the clarification that the information posted is actually correct.

 

 

Your quote above does not show whom the actual requester actually is.. This is my point tbh. That Council decided that for accuracy of the ID of the requester be confirmed. It still appears that the post in question is a presumption, unless proof can be provided.

 

 

That should be very easy to provide and in a very short time.

[ploddertom]

People make requests via a name whether that be their real name or an alias, for those names mentioned the number of requests made are 99, 124, 60 & 64 respectively. It would not take you long to look this up yourself as I have spent enough time on this alreadyn nor should anyone else. We can all provide different results but the chances of supplying exactly what you want is remote which is why I suggest you do your own.

 

In any case this has little to do with this thread and if you want to take it further then a new thread should be started in the appropriate Forum to take it further.

[mikeymack2002]

I have no intention of starting a new thread which would be pointless, I was as others have said to me, please provide your proof, that's all I have done, since none will be forthcoming this will I assume be HEARSAY so let other decide for themselves.

 

 

I was just pointing out the obvious question that should be asked and answered.

 

 

Thx for your time PT and info as I never would have looked at that site for information. Informative... I will refrain from posting on this thread again unless this information is provided.

[honeybee13]

I have no intention of starting a new thread which would be pointless, I was as others have said to me, please provide your proof, that's all I have done, since none will be forthcoming this will I assume be HEARSAY so let other decide for themselves.

 

 

I was just pointing out the obvious question that should be asked and answered.

 

 

Thx for your time PT and info as I never would have looked at that site for information. Informative... I will refrain from posting on this thread again unless this information is provided.

 

Hi Mikeymack.

 

If people choose to post on the interweb under various identities, I'm not sure how we at CAG are meant to verify who they are?

 

Apologies if I've misunderstood your question.

 

HB

[mikeymack2002]

honeybee13

 

 

I wasn't going to post again on this thread but the fact that a poster has stated that the requests were from the same person, for clarity and ACCURACY I asked them to provide this information.

 

 

PT gave an example that showed nothing. All I saw was a name which can be anyone. But if a poster has identified positively that the requester is the same person and can accurately name them then they should show where this information is available to view, otherwise it is just hearsay and is nothing of value.

 

 

It will do more harm now not to provide this information and could harm the reputation of the poster of that comment. If this information is now provided so that everyone can see it then maybe the post can be substantiated fully if not it was a pointless post.

 

 

I have been often asked to provide a link to my answers, but due to the amount of info in my mind sometimes I forget to provide the link to the information, once done then this information can be viewed and commented on in full....

 

 

Please see the purple in post #33

[Peterbard]

MM

If you go on what do they know and search the names mentioned yourself you will see that they are all about the same or similar subjects and to most of us it is obvious they originate from the same source, if you do the same research and come to a different conclusion then that is fine, we must agree to differ.

[mikeymack2002]

DB

 

 

Without you knowing for a FACT the requestor IS one and the same person then your assumptions are dangerous. Yes you may draw a CONCLUSION of information but at the end of the day I am very much afraid it is conjecture. That word has no place in law. Please see this link for further info

https://www.google.co.uk/#q=what+is+conjecture

[Bailiff Advice]

I don't mean to doubt you but please for the forum state where this information is fact, so we can see where your allegation has come from? Hearsay is inadmissible. So would you be so kind as to provide a positive link to this information? Or provide confirmation from each relevant Authority that can prove that these FoI were from the same person. A pdf from those Councils should show the forum that this is indeed correct....

 

MM.

 

The comment (many from the same person using a variety of different aliases) was mine and I will of coure respond. I am just recovering from a very long day gardening so will reply later this evening.

 

In the meantime I would like to make an important point. I have no hesitation in saying that the FOI requests that I have read on What doThey Know are clearly written by an intelligent individual who is very knoweldgeable on the subject of council tax and whose opinion should be held in high esteem.

[mikeymack2002]

BA it is not my intention to offend but to have a clear and precise understanding that is all. If the original poster can be identified fully and accurately then the requests are in trouble, because the requests are and should be held in the strictest of confidence and un-identifiable to a 3rd party (the public) and most if not all FoI requests' contain a warning

 

 

"This information supplied to you is copyrighted and continues to be protected by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. You are free to use it for your own purposes, including any non commercial research you are doing and for the purposes of news reporting. Any other reuse, for example commercial publication, would require our specific permission, may involve licensing and the application of a charge."

 

Some of the requests contain the names of the requester but if they have used an alias how could they be clearly identified by the way they write, (according to DB) they can? it is just such a strange assumption in the first place... Can you now see why I have questioned the way that post #33 shows that "people know" who the requestor is? If an alias is used can you please conform how you would know?

[Coughdrop]

Those dreadful freedom of information requests have proved to be an inexpensive way of ensuring local authorities' legal services are conversant with the relevant law. As it is they're typically on six figure salaries, how much would it cost to secure legal officers who knew what they were doing?

 

I know this is a little off thread, apologies for that, however I found the above quotation interesting, as I know just how high you need to be in local government to receive a six figure salary. A quick 'Google' took me here where even the Assistant Director of Legal and Governance for Salford City Council receives just £74000, with Senior Lawyers in the £33-40K bracket and Legal Officers on £20-22K. I was surprised how low the Senior Lawyer's salary was, and also the comparatively small gap between these posts and those of Legal Officers. I know the groups' representatives fight fiercely to maintain pay differentials, so I found it interesting.

 

There certainly are not that many in each LA's legal department on a six figure salary, let alone 'typically' on six figure salaries; the typical salary would fall well short of six figures.

 

Sorry, back to topic, but I found it interesting.

[doggone it]

 

1 response from Haringey went on to say the following:

"

From: FOI

Haringey Borough Council

17 February 2015

 

Dear Mr Layne,

 

 

 

Further to my comments of 14 January,

 

“As we have no Haringey council tax payer called Mr Arnold Layne, we

believe you may be using a false name in your correspondence with us. We

believe that you may also be acting alongside or be using the name “Ms

Enid Brighton” who also posts FOI requests via the What Do They Know

website on a similar theme.”

 

 

 

Could you please provide some form of identification to confirm that your

name is Arnold Layne? Such as:

 

 

 

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

|Proof of Identity |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current valid (signed) full UK Passport |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current valid (signed) overseas Passport |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current valid EEA Member State ID card |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current Residency Permit issued by Home Office |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current Full UK Driving Licence |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current UK/EU Photocard Driving Licence |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current State Pension book/notification letter |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current Benefits Agency Book/letter |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Current years Inland Revenue Tax Code Notification |

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

 

 

 

Regards,

 

xxx xxxx

 

Feedback Team Leader"

 

Going back to this you say this says nothing & is irrelevant. to me it speaks volumes in that this local authority received numerous FOI requests all on a similar theme and all couched in similar terms only this time the Council are waking up to the point they are being used as pawns. They are pointing out they have received similar in the past and possibly do not wish to waste valuable resources going over old ground. If you are really keen on finding out you would spend the time to look rather than wait for others to provide it for you - do you have something to hide or are you perhaps one of the posters of these requests.

[Peterbard]

DB

 

 

Without you knowing for a FACT the requestor IS one and the same person then your assumptions are dangerous. Yes you may draw a CONCLUSION of information but at the end of the day I am very much afraid it is conjecture. That word has no place in law. Please see this link for further info

https://www.google.co.uk/#q=what+is+conjecture

 

MM

 

This is an internet forum not a court of law, there is no hersay here and conjecture is allowed

[ripvan]

The information is interesting that has been posted regarding the pseudonyms which Haringey Borough Council has alleged are being used by the requester, Arnold Layne, on the whatdotheyknow website.

 

I believe Haringey have had a succession of High Court/Supreme Court Judgments ruling against it in the past few years and doubt it would be happy if there was another legal challenge to embarrass it further.

 

What I'm getting at is, if a person has submitted FOI requests under a pseudonym, which that person is perfectly entitled to do, the authority is obliged to act in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998, as it takes on the role as either a data controller or data processor.

 

Therefore, if it is trying to expose someone who has opted to remain anonymous, then this must be a breach of that legislation. As a word of warning, there may be implications for CAG if it too is attempting to expose someone posting, who is clearly using a pseudonym, either on the forum or else ware if it is considered a data controller or processor as defined in the Data Protection Act 1998.

[ploddertom]

The information is interesting that has been posted regarding the pseudonyms which Haringey Borough Council has alleged are being used by the requester, Arnold Layne, on the whatdotheyknow website.

 

I believe Haringey have had a succession of High Court/Supreme Court Judgments ruling against it in the past few years and doubt it would be happy if there was another legal challenge to embarrass it further.

 

What I'm getting at is, if a person has submitted FOI requests under a pseudonym, which that person is perfectly entitled to do, the authority is obliged to act in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998, as it takes on the role as either a data controller or data processor.

 

Therefore, if it is trying to expose someone who has opted to remain anonymous, then this must be a breach of that legislation. As a word of warning, there may be implications for CAG if it too is attempting to expose someone posting, who is clearly using a pseudonym, either on the forum or else ware if it is considered a data controller or processor as defined in the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

No one is trying to "out" anyone, the names & number of posts given for each are freely availiable & the quote from Haringey shows what that particular local authority thinks. Like all things how many people on here have more than 1 identity.

[ploddertom]

There are 2 previous threads which should be read in conjunction with this one.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?440100-Freedom-of-Information-requests-Local-authorities-and-Taking-Control-of-Goods-%28Fees%29-2014&highlight=foi+requests

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?439517-Avoiding-bailiff-fees-by-paying-creditor-direct.....Freedom-of-Information-requests.&highlight=foi+requests

[ploddertom]

I have tried to separate the FOI into this this new thread. If there are any I have missed or overlooked then let us know, the same goes for the thread title.

[Bailiff Advice]

 

What I'm getting at is, if a person has submitted FOI requests under a pseudonym, which that person is perfectly entitled to do, the authority is obliged to act in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998, as it takes on the role as either a data controller or data processor.

 

Therefore, if it is trying to expose someone who has opted to remain anonymous, then this must be a breach of that legislation. As a word of warning, there may be implications for CAG if it too is attempting to expose someone posting, who is clearly using a pseudonym, either on the forum or else ware if it is considered a data controller or processor as defined in the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

I would tend to disagree with some of the above. The Freedom of Information Act 2000 specifically provides under section 8.1 (link below) that a request for information must be in writing and must provide the name of the applicant and the address for correspondence. Accordingly, I would be very surprised indeed if on a legal basis a false name/pseudonym would in any way suffice.

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/section/8?view=plain

 

I would also disagree with your comment that if a person does submit an FOI request under a pseudonym that the authority "is obliged to act in accordance with the Data Protection Act"

 

It would appear that Humberside Police in responding to an FOI request by 'Dan Stevens' also shares my view:

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/allegations_of_fraud_against_ros_3#comment-48587

 

As you will note their response states as follows:

 

Further to your request for information regarding North East Lincs Council and Rossendales Bailiffs, after a review of cases submitted by:

 

Neil Gilliatt,

 

Dan Stephens,

 

Rex Ole,

 

Malcolm Admin,

 

Cyril Alfab,

 

this unit believes that

they are all from the same individual

[Bailiff Advice]

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/allegations_of_fraud_against_ros_3#comment-48587

 

 

The above link (to a request from 'Dan Stevens' to Humberside Police relates to a serious allegation against North East Lincolnshire Council). In his FOI request (to Humberside Police) 'Mr Stevens' refers to a post on this forum by a poster by the user name of 'Outlawla'.

 

The complaint to North East Lincolnshire Council is just one many complaints made regarding either 'Head H' fees, summons costs, bailiff fees, allocation of direct payments etc, etc' .

 

It is generally considered that the individual responsible for the complaint is Mr Neil Gilliatt and as evidence, below is a publicly available copy of his complaint (regarding North East Lincolnshire Council) to the First Tier Tribunal at the Information Commissioners Office. Naturally I assume that he used his real name !!

 

 

http://www.informationtribunal.gov.uk/DBFiles/Decision/i986/2013_02_13;%20Neil%20Gilliatt;%20EA.2012.0254.pdf

 

Following Freedom of Information requests to North East Lincolnshire Council it does appear to be somewhat of a coincidence that the same query is then sent by other names including the following:

 

 

Tom Bola

 

Rex Ole

 

Malcolm Admin

 

Cyril Alfab

 

Becky Saunder

 

Dan Stevens

 

Enid Brighton

 

Arnold Layne

 

Lee Johnsone

 

Cherie Jerez

 

Hump Balustrade

 

R.Skinner

 

Emma Dale

 

Sacksen Molar

 

Enid Brighton

 

PS: As stated by me yesterday in another post:

 

I have no hesitation in saying that the FOI requests that I have read on What doThey Know are clearly written by an intelligent individual who is very knoweldgeable on the subject of council tax and whose opinion should be held in high esteem.

[Peterbard]

I think if the wider question is if it contrary to any law to expose the identity of someone using a pseudonym, I would say no it isn't.

With the proviso that the party doing the unmasking must be correct or risk actions being taken against them for defamation etc.

[Bailiff Advice]

Approx half of all local authorities in England & Wales have also received Freedom of Information requests regarding the way in which 'direct payments' made by debtors after bailiff enforcement is calculated. The requests and responses have not been made public and accordingly, cannot be relied up.

[Bailiff Advice]

 

What I'm getting at is, if a person has submitted FOI requests under a pseudonym, which that person is perfectly entitled to do.

 

Not so I'm afraid and this is confirmed by the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) in their following pdf:

 

https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1164/recognising-a-request-made-under-the-foia.pdf

 

Paragraph 15 states as follows:

 

In our view, the intention of the legislation is for the requester to provide their

real name

so their request could be processed in accordance with the requirements of the FOIA.

 

Paragraph 21 states as follows:

 

For a request to be valid, the requester must provide enough of their

real name

to give anyone reading that request a reasonable indication of their identity.

 

Taking the above into consideration I would be very surprised indeed if any of the following were the real names of the person making the Freedom of Information request:

 

Tom Bola

 

Rex Ole

 

Cyril Alfab

 

Enid Brighton

 

Hump Balustrade

 

R.Skinner

 

Emma Dale

 

Sacksen Molar

[Coughdrop]

It's interesting reading the ICO's comments on prospective EU Regulation of Data Protection found here. The ICO talks about 'pseudonymous data'. They comment on, "the introduction of the concept of pseudonymous data which the ICO thinks will muddy the distinction between personal and non-personal data;"

 

The same logic would seem to apply to any normal FOI request. If it is made under a pseudonym it would 'muddy the distinction between personal and non-personal data', especially where there is a suspicion, or dare I say reasonable suspicion, that the person making the request has made other requests using other names.

 

Equally, I'm sure I've read ICO guidance which states if an FOI request is made and the public body believe it is made under a pseudonym, while they have the right to refuse to answer, good practice dictates they should not do so if the question is a reasonable one - something along those lines.

[Coughdrop]

Not so I'm afraid and this is confirmed by the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) in their following pdf:

 

https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1164/recognising-a-request-made-under-the-foia.pdf

 

Paragraph 15 states as follows:

 

In our view, the intention of the legislation is for the requester to provide their

real name

so their request could be processed in accordance with the requirements of the FOIA.

 

Paragraph 21 states as follows:

 

For a request to be valid, the requester must provide enough of their

real name

to give anyone reading that request a reasonable indication of their identity.

 

Taking the above into consideration I would be very surprised indeed if any of the following were the real names of the person making the Freedom of Information request:

 

Tom Bola

 

Rex Ole

 

Cyril Alfab

 

Enid Brighton

 

Hump Balustrade

 

R.Skinner

 

Emma Dale

 

Sacksen Molar

 

I've clearly got too much time on my hands this morning. A quick 'Google' shows people living in the UK called

 

Thomas Bola, quite a few called Emma Dale, and lots of poor souls lumbered with the name R. Skinner .

 

The remainder of the names above show only as FOI requests.