Stephen Kenyon CPFA

Interim Executive Director of Resources and Regulation

Department for

Resources and Regulation

Jayne Hammond LLB (Hons) Solicitor

Assistant Director

Legal & Democratic Services

Town Hall

Knowsley Street

Bury BL9 0SW

Electronic or fax service of Legal Documents is not accepted

Our RefJCW/036468

Your RefMr N Gregory

Your fax

Date19 August 2016

Please ask forJanet Witkowski

Direct Line0161 2535219

Fax No 0161 2535119

E-Mail:

Mr Nathan Gregory

By email only to:

Dear Mr Gregory

Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) - Review

I write further to your email of 10th May 2016 in which you requested a review of the Council’s decision of 11th May 2016, in relation to your request for information made on 20th April 2016 regardingcopies of the Traffic Penalty Tribunal adjudicator's decisions in relation to The Rock, Bury.

I must first of all apologise for the delay in responding to this matter. This was due to staff absence and the fact that some of the information requested had been archived and further copies had to be obtained directly from the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT).

I also note that you made an initial request for information of a similar nature on 22nd March 2016, which was responded to on 19th April 2016. That response then appears to have led to your request of 20th April 2016 and I have therefore decided to review the response to that earlier request at the same time.

I can confirm that I have now conducted a review of both responses and would advise you that the decisions are partially upheld for the following reasons:

  1. Your original request of 22nd March 2016 requested TPT decisions and also PCN’s issued, paid, appealed and the decisions of those appeals, in relation to the Rock, Bury. The request was refused in relation to all of the information requested, citing the costs exemption set out in section 12 of FOIA. The letter I note did provide some information as to how the cost limit would be reached and stated ‘We do not hold the data for PCNs issued by areas and therefore cannot break down the whole of The Rock’s PCNs for the data you require without interrogating the whole database.’ However, although I am satisfied this was a correct application of the exemption, it was insufficient to comply with sections 16 and 17 of FOIA. It should have indicated that the current system used by the Council has been in use since NSL (the company who is contracted to undertake parking enforcement in Bury) began to work for the Council in 2002 and that it contains data on all PCN’s issued since that time. I understand that the system does not delineate between areas of Bury and further only recent cases have documents available. The remainder are

disposed of, or archived. This means that without time parameters it would indeed have taken more than 18 hours to provide the information requested as each PCN file would have to be interrogated and there are in excess of 13000. However, you should not only have received this more detailed explanation, but also have been asked to refine your request by stating a period of time and told that this may have reduced the cost implications.

  1. Your request of 20th April 2016 was specifically for TPT decisions regarding the Rock, Bury, and I note you refer in this request to it being an amendment to your original request. This was responded to on 10th May 2016, again by way of a refusal citing section 12 and the cost limit and it also cited ‘data protection issues.’ You were however told;

‘the non-archived Tribunal cases that are retained in Parking Services show that:

There were 5 PCN's appealed for The Rock at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

There were 2 appeals dismissed

There were 2 appeals allowed

There is 1 case awaiting a decision.’

However, although I am again satisfied this was a correct application of both of the exemptions referred to, it was insufficient to comply with sections 16,17and 40 of FOIA. My reasoning for the non-compliance with sections 16 and 17 is the same as set out in paragraph 1 above. In relation to section 40, the response should have set out the reasons this exemption applied namely it would reveal information that would identify individuals and this may therefore breach the data protection principles. Further, you could have been provided with copies of the decisions referred to in the Council’s response of 10th May and as you rightly indicated in your request for a review, the personal data could have been redacted. I therefore enclose copies 4 of the decisions referred to in paragraph 2 above for your information, the 5th being the decision in your own appeal which I believe you will already have a copy of.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

Information Commissioner’s Officer

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

Tel: 0303 123 1113

Yours sincerely,

Jane Hammond

Council Solicitor and

Assistant Director Legal and Democratic Services

Enc. Copy TPT Decisions x4