Vexatious Requests to CRT under Freedom of Information Act ?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Tanglewood said:

I'm sure you didn't intend for this to come across in such a jeering, sneering way.

?

[Sbg]

In response to my FOI request in regards to the total cost of the re-branding exercise:

 

This information  is outside of the scope of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) as it applies to the Trust. The Trust derives its powers from the statutory functions transferred to it by the British Waterways Board (Transfer of Functions) Order 2012, but only for a limited range of its activities; namely those relating to the operation and maintenance of the Waterways, please see a full explanation below.  Please do see the interview with our Chairman, which includes a short video explaining the reason for rebranding here:  https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/news-and-views/features/our-chairman-gives-his-opinion-on-our-new-brand

We estimate the cost of developing the logo, basic guidelines and market research to be around £60,000. There will be some further costs of the initial roll-out which will be covered within our existing marketing budget. We will continue to roll out other things, like uniform and signage, on a replacement and renewal basis over the next two years.

 

It was signed by: 

 

(removed the name)

Student Placement – Legal & Governance Services

T 0113 2816823

 

Now, I see a couple of issues here:

 

1.  "We estimate....to be approximately..." are they hiding the truth or don't they have any proper project managers? 

2. The untruth in regards to rolling out signage on a replacement or renewal basis is well-documented

3. Nice to see they are using undergraduates to communicate with their "customers".... credibility is everything, after all!

 

I've gone back to them with the message that this neither answers the question (whole cost) nor provides any confidence that any answers given are complete and truthful.

Their next step will determine the involvement of the ICO and / or my MP....

[Allan(nb Albert)]

3 minutes ago, Sbg said:

In response to my FOI request in regards to the total cost of the re-branding exercise:

 

This information  is outside of the scope of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) as it applies to the Trust. The Trust derives its powers from the statutory functions transferred to it by the British Waterways Board (Transfer of Functions) Order 2012, but only for a limited range of its activities; namely those relating to the operation and maintenance of the Waterways, please see a full explanation below.  Please do see the interview with our Chairman, which includes a short video explaining the reason for rebranding here:  https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/news-and-views/features/our-chairman-gives-his-opinion-on-our-new-brand

We estimate the cost of developing the logo, basic guidelines and market research to be around £60,000. There will be some further costs of the initial roll-out which will be covered within our existing marketing budget. We will continue to roll out other things, like uniform and signage, on a replacement and renewal basis over the next two years.

 

It was signed by: 

 

(removed the name)

Student Placement – Legal & Governance Services

T 0113 2816823

 

Now, I see a couple of issues here:

 

1.  "We estimate....to be approximately..." are they hiding the truth or don't they have any proper project managers? 

2. The untruth in regards to rolling out signage on a replacement or renewal basis is well-documented

3. Nice to see they are using undergraduates to communicate with their "customers".... credibility is everything, after all!

 

I've gone back to them with the message that this neither answers the question (whole cost) nor provides any confidence that any answers given are complete and truthful.

Their next step will determine the involvement of the ICO and / or my MP....

The usual signatory these days is Melissa Ashdown-Hoff, Information Officer – Legal and Governance Services. She seems to have replaced Frazer Halcrow who disappeared after C&RT's Governance, Assurance & Risk Manager blamed him for three alterations to a response. However, over the lat couple of months Alex Czabaniuk's name has appeared on some responses.

You need them to formally review the decision that your request is outside the scope of the Act.

I would suggest you read David Mayall's  similar request at https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/costs_of_rebranding
 

In particular, his request for review dated 12/6/2018

 

Quote

 

Dear Canal & River Trust,

 

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

 

I am writing to request an internal review of Canal & River Trust's handling of my FOI request 'Costs of rebranding'.

 

You have declined to provide the requested information, but instead directed me to your public statements which wilfully hide the true costs of the exercise from the public (presumably because those costs would prove embarrassing to the trust).

 

You have done so, on the basis that the Trust is required to comply with Freedom of Information requests only in respect of the Statutory Funclions transferred from British Waterways (namely the operation and management of waterways).

 

I would contend that the provision of signage which directs boaters as to mooring restrictions, or which advises them of the facilities available at a location relates to the provision of a service or facility (such as a mooring or a service station), or may itself be a service (in the case of a sign which identifies a canal or location).

The British Waterways Board was empowered to provide services or facilities on waterways owned or managed by them by virtue of s 10 (1) (a) of the Transport Act 1962, and as such the provision of Signage is a Discretionary Statutory Function that the Trust inherited from the British Waterways Board, and subject to the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act.

 

Similarly, the provision of uniforms to members of staff is a necessary step to enable those staff to be identified as such when carrying out a statutory function, and expenditure on staff uniforms is related to the carrying out of a statutory function.

 

Whilst I feel sure that the details of expenditure on this exercise at a time when trust has significant maintenance expenditure that it cannot fund will be embarrassing, avoiding embarrassment is not a legitimate reason to refuse to supply information, and further attempts to rely on incorrect claims about information being exempt can only lead to a complaint to the Information Commissioner, and I would suggest that being forced to divulge embarrassing information by the IC would be even more embarrassing for the Trust than just biting the bullet and providing the information.

 

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

 

Yours faithfully,

 

David Mayall

 

I think the only thing missed out is C&RT's undertaking to provide information even if outside the scope of the Act. To that end you may wish to quote the following from the whatdotheyknow.com website -

 

Quote

Canal & River Trust is subject to Environmental Information Regulations and also subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 with respect to functions inherited from British Waterways. The Canal & River Trust have undertaken to voluntarily release information where they can regardless of whether they are obliged to do so.

 

[Sbg]

Thanks Allan - very helpful.  

 

ETA: The response is word for word the same as mine. No surprises there though....

Edited June 25, 2018 by Sbg

[mrsmelly]

On 22/05/2018 at 01:39, Allan(nb Albert) said:

As one of the thousands of boaters who were assured that C&RT's recent licence consultation would be revenue neutral, I do have a passing interest in finding out why my licence fee is going up rather than down ...

I bought my first boat licence in 1989 and one or more every year since. They have gone up each year. Surely no one believed that anything was going to be revenue neutral? Political parties produce a manifest etc prior to a general election, can anyone tell me when any political party ever kept to it? Its the same old codswollop and not worth a moments glance.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

A partial success on one of the FOI requests that C&RT were rejecting as vexatious.

 

The minutes of the Board of Trustees Meeting held on 22 March in York.

 

The unpublished papers from the Board of Trustees Meeting held on 25 January in Coventry.

 

Unfortunately, they are still withholding information regarding -

 

A copy of minute 18/007 (which appears to have been inadvertently left out of published minutes).

 

Copies of any report or presentation made by Jon Horsfall, Matthew Symonds or any other person in connection with minute 18/007. This includes both reports and presentations made during Board meetings, prior to Board meetings or subsequent to Board meetings.

 

 

Edited July 9, 2018 by Allan(nb Albert)