Email sent to Council Solicitor 06/07/13 at 05.08
Dear Mr Khan
Polite reminder I have still not received a satisfactory answer from you ref:-
1.The external football pitch and changing rooms.
2. The Storage water tank under the football pitch
3. The Class 1 Petrol/Oil Separator next to manhole #13 on the attached drawings.
4. The rainwater harvesting tank shown on the attached drawings.
5.These drawing do not indicate any grease traps outside the kitchen area?
This drawing indicates the Playgound run-off water will be drained into the existing pond which cannot be correct.
I would be most grateful if you would now elevate these matters to your immediate line manager. It should also be noted thia attached drawing was sent to me as an AS BUILT DRAWING and you can clearly see it is NOT an As Built Drawing but is a PROPOSED drawing.
With thanks
Yours sincerely
Alan M Dransfield
——————————–
And Khan’s reply:-
Subject: FW: Valve View School Outstanding Issues – FOI 7420 – Response
Dear Mr Dransfield,
I am writing in response to your request for information (ref FOI 7420).
This request for information has been refused under Section 14(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 as it has been deemed vexatious.
Although the term vexatious is not defined by the legislation, I have taken this decision considering the themes as provided by the Upper Tribunal case of Information Commissioner v Devon CC and Dransfield [2012] UKUT 440 (ACC).
Stockport Council has received numerous requests for information from you since June 2011. On the whole, these requests have related to various building regulations and/or safety inspections primarily about Vale View Primary School in North Reddish.
On 9th April 2013 I provided you with a refusal notice explaining why the decision had been taken to refuse your (at the time) outstanding FOIA requests.
Although the FOIA provides a significant right to request information, this right is not overriding. More importantly, this right does not extend to providing a channel for unauthorised investigations into the legality of building constructions by members of the public.
To continue to attempt to use the Act in this way is considered to be vexatious in the sense of it being a manifestly unjustified, inappropriate or improper use of FOIA.
As this request appears to be continuing this theme Stockport Council has taken the decision to refuse this request for information under Section 14(1) of the FOIA.
As this request has been refused, there is no provision for an internal review to be conducted by the Council.
If you are unhappy with this response, you are entitled to complain to the Information Commissioner. I understand that you have already raised this to the ICO under their reference FS50493287. The Council are not prepared to enter into any further discussion on this matter pending the outcome of the ICO’s investigation.
Yours sincerely,
Simon Oldfield
Freedom of Information/ Data Protection Officer & RIPA Coordinator
Stockport Council
Town Hall
Stockport
SK1 3XE
Tel: 0161 474 4048
——————–
Email sent to the ICO 17 July 2013 15:30
Dear Sirs
Please see the response from the Stockport Borough Council (SBC) in reply to my FOIA request. I now wish to elevate this as a formal complaint to the ICO.
It would appear to be a useless exercise to ask the SBC to review their decision; hence, I am going straight to the ICO please.
Please advise me a case reference number and a case worker’s name.
Its rather ironic that I am refused a FOIA requests under protection of the GIA/3037/2011 which is well known to all men that it is a ROGUE DECISION.
I consider this latest SBC decsion to be a willful attempt to breach Section 77 of the FOIA 2000.
With thanks
Yours sincerely
Alan M Dransfield
