Sheila Oliver's Campaigning Website

Go to content

Main menu

FOIA Abuses

LibDem FOIA/EIR 2004 abuses
 



From: Hugh Lambourne
Poole Borough Council

8 February 2013
Dear Mr Dransfield,
I may not have communicated effecively. We do not retain hard copy
documents, but the contract and all of its schedules and annexes are
retained in pdf format. This means that in order to ensure that all of the
relevant sections and paragraphs are redacted I will need to print the
documents and carry out the exercise by hand. I can then scan the
documents and send them on a disc, or send the hard copy, hence your
choice of formats.
Can you please confirm what you mean by "downsize my request"?
I will check regarding the SHE plan and confirm.
Kind regards
Hugh Lambourne
Sent from my mobile


This was his response to an earlier rejection of £450 request for their FOIA compliance.

This chap need further training how to deal with records. He maintains he needs to (wait for it) print off from PDF records, redact them, scan back into PDF then send to me either by Disk or email.

No  wonder it would cost more than the £450 ceiling. What's wrong with doing the redacting via the PC?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Please see above. The woman - Sager - investigating the matter is the project leader of a project with massive financial irregularities and a project which actually constitutes an offence under the Fraud Act 2006.  Not really likely to get proper investigation from her - and so it turned out.

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/financial-irregularities.html


http://www.sheilaoliver.org/not-big-enough-one-year-on.html








Email sent to the Council's Complaints Officer, Anwar Majothi, on 22nd August 2009 at 09.33
c.c. Councillor Weldon, John Schultz, Martin Candler, Michael Warburton of the ICO, Barry Khan


Dear Mr Majothi

From the Harcourt Street Highlight report for period 15/3/06 - 14/05/20

"Aspirations continue to exceed budget provision and at this stage the scheme is undeliverable if the funding (or Brief) is not revisited."
Highlight report for period 15/3/06 - 14/5/06

"Funding shortfall will lead to ultimate project failure if not addressed i.e., unable to enter into contract". This was when the cost was circa £8.6 million - it is now circa £10 million.

From the Fir Tree Consultation with Governors 06/07/05
"There was concern from the governors that families in the Fir Tree area will have difficulty in getting to the proposed new site. The governors felt the outreach work would need to be increased as they felt parents from the school would not walk to the new facilities. The governors supports a new school but would wish the site to be in the Fir Tree community"

How much has the outreach work been costed at?

I look forward to hearing from you.

Mrs Sheila Oliver
Stockport's Freedom of Information Campaigner

This was the final outcome:
http://www.sheilaoliver.org/financial-irregularities.html

Mr Majothi and his boss Adrian Moores have get to apologise to me for having been publicly branded "vexatious" and for Mr Majothi's lies told the Information Commission regarding this matter.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Email sent by me on 22nd August 2009 at 1949
c.c. to Barr Khan, Steve Lamb, John Schultz

Dear Mr Majothi

Another irregularity - Mr John Hill demanded a map from me to a certain scale for my village green application. So, I took a day's holiday from my work in a busy cancer department and went to a specialist map shop in Manchester to get it. "What on earth do you want this for?" asked the lady in the shop incredulously - "it will cost over £300" (she gave me a written estimate to use as evidence). "Stockport Council demanded it for my village green claim", I replied. There ensued much speculation as to whether Stockport Council was corrupt. A chap from a developers who has exensive experience of planning who also happened to be in the shop said Stockport Council was well known for asking people to jump through more and more ridiculous and expensive hoops until eventually they gave up. I have seen something of this kind with regards to planning.
I was furious and went to the very nice Council cartographers who said they could provide a map to the Council but not to me for £5.

Why was a asked to provide this ridiculously expensive one sheet of paper map?
I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours
Mrs S J Oliver
Stockport's Freedom of Information Campaigner

Mr Majothi said that my mentioning this matter was "vexatious".

---------------------------------------------------------------------------



Email sent by me to Mr Majothi on 24th August 2009 at 20.44
c.c.
Barry Khan, Mark Weldon, Martin Candler, John Schulz, Michael Warburton of the ICO


Dear Mr Majothi

Please see the attached.

The new centre was to provide 78 nursery places. We have seen that the birth rate in the area is rising. The nursery places now to be provided at the proposed children's centre are around 50. I assume this is because the site is too small for purpose, in which case the school should not be going on this site.
Given all I have sent you so far, I am starting to smell a pretty strong rat.
Your comments please.

Yours

Mrs S J Oliver
Stockport's Freedom of Information Campaigner

Majothi deemed this request "vexatious"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



As it turned out there was no room for a nursery school as promised, just a nursery class.  No apology yet from Majothi for the lies he told to the Information Commission about me, and no apology yet from his line manager, Adrian Moores.

Back to content | Back to main menu