Met Police - learning results of submissions

Calling HoarseMann!

If you look back to the links in my post below with the Travellers Choice coach photo, you'll know what this refusal letter from Lancashire Constabulary dated 9.2.23 is about

Lancashire Constabulary can neither confirm nor deny that it holds any information relevant to this request as the duty in Section1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply, by virtue of the following exemption:
 Section 40(5) Personal Information
To confirm or deny whether we hold any information would in itself reveal the personal data of the subject(s). It is important to note that disclosures under the FOIA are considered as disclosures “to the world” and as such, to confirm or deny whether or not any information is held would be unfair on the data subject(s).
This exemption is engaged therefore as it satisfies the following two conditions:
1. To confirm whether or not the information is held would reveal the personal data of a data subject as defined by Article 4 (1) of GDPR and Part 1 Section (3)(2) of the Data Protection Act 2018.
2. That to confirm whether or not the information is held would contravene one of the data protection principles contained within GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 respectively, namely the first one, which states that personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully (and in the case of GDPR in a transparent manner).
Section 40(5) is an absolute class-based exemption therefore neither the public interest test nor evidence of harm in disclosure needs to be outlined.
This letter serves to act as a refusal notice for this request, as per S.17 (1) of the FOI Act. As per Section 40(5) of the FOI Act, this letter should not be taken as a confirmation or denial that Lancashire Constabulary holds any information pertinent to this request.

I'm going to resubmit the FoI request again, just to see how much time, expense and effort they're prepared to waste on the cover-up. What I would like from HoarseMann, and from Rendel in the event that the Met does eventually fulfil their promise is a case with a description of the original offence and a piece of the evidence submitted with the registration number of the vehicle, along with the outcome. Thanks

I was pleased this week that, although Operation Snap can't tell you the outcome of individual reports (beyond "positive action taken") they did proactively respond to some of my reports to tell me how I can better evidence the offence so they can take further action. Turns out they prefer video evidence to prove beyond doubt a car is parked on zig zag lines; a still won't do.  

A little pedantic point on this "after I said that if they wouldn't tell me the outcome of a submission I would have to make an FOI request for it".

If you had asked them for the information, then they were obliged to supply it under the terms on the Freedom of Information Act.  You don't have to make "an FOI request". 

The relevant section of the Act is below - as you'll see, no need to say "this is an FOI request".  (To be clear, I'm not criticising Rendel, but public authorities who don't understand their duties.)

8 Request for information.

(1) In this Act any reference to a “request for information” is a reference to such a request which—

(a) is in writing,

(b) states the name of the applicant and an address for correspondence, and

(c) describes the information requested.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(a), a request is to be treated as made in writing where the text of the request—

(a) is transmitted by electronic means,

(b) is received in legible form, and

(c) is capable of being used for subsequent reference.

I'm loving this thread - no road tax (VED), but lots of Roman taxonomy(Vedi)

(Yes, I'm also mentally scarred from having to study latin at school, but this did mean that I laughed louder than most, at the scene in Life of Brian.)

We're approaching half way through December 24 now- any progress on the Met's hopefully will be live in December 2024, where you will be able to view the results of Public Reporting traffic offences?

I'm compiling my evidence to APPGCW, and pointing out the great lengths the police go to in covering-up that they didn't do anything about offences against cyclists. Lancashire refused to tell me, citing the usual GDPR distortion, while Northampton puts out huge lists of what happened in all their cases- you just have to know the reference number to find the relevant case on the published spreadsheet. So is the Carrick-Couzens Memorial Police Force going to come up with the promised counterpart to the Northampton scheme?

I'm pleased to say I didn't 'do' Latin, but I was also pleased to learn the origin of 'laconic'

Gloucestershire have told me the outcomes to nearly all my reports. I have to wait 12 months to find out now whereas I got them immediately before 2023. They are rarely the outcomes I want but it just highlights the inconsistency between forces. Gloucestershire will now only send an advisory letter for a close pass no matter how close (used to be NFA until recently) but will tell you the outcome where as other forces are the exact opposite.

Semper ubi sub ubi (nisi sub lycra?)

after I said that if they wouldn't tell me the outcome of a submission I would have to make an FOI request for it

This has been discussed at length before, but it's a lot to read. I don't think the police are worried by threats to make FoI requests because they will simply refuse them. Here is the Information Commissioner's Decision Notice on my attempt to expose the police lying about taking action over this case. They did essentially nothing- most likely a joke advice letter

https://upride.cc/incident/4148vz_travellerschoicecoach_closepass/

This proposed Met scheme to reveal all follows the Northamptonshire Police equivalent, which I was informed about by HoarseMann last year. There's a mass of information in there, but without the reference you won't find out much- nearly all of the offences against cyclists will be shown at the top end of the spreadsheet if it's sorted 'Ascending' on the Offence Description column, but they'll be hidden under the great mass of 'Driving without due care and attention' and you won't be able to find ones involving cyclists. I haven't spent much time on this because what I want is information on Lancashire Constabulary- and they're prepared to spend an almost infinite amount of time and money on making sure I don't get it.

Romanes eunt domus