FS50105724: Difference between revisions
From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Alex skene (talk | contribs) m Text replace - "DNDecision2" to "DNDecision" |
Alex skene (talk | contribs) m Text replace - "DNDecision1" to "DNDecision" |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2006/fs50105724.pdf | |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2006/fs50105724.pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ | {{DNDecision | ||
|dnd_section=FOI 12 | |dnd_section=FOI 12 | ||
|dnd_finding=Not upheld | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
Latest revision as of 22:26, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50105724
- Date: 11 December 2006
- Public Authority: London Borough of Sutton
- Summary: The complainant submitted a request to the public authority for information about parking fines issued over a six month period. The public authority refused to answer the complainant’s request on the grounds that to provide the information would exceed the cost limit. The Commissioner investigated this claim and accepts that the public authority could not have answered the request within the cost limit. However, the Commissioner established that the public authority failed to provide the complainant with any advice and assistance. The also Commissioner established that the complainant’s request had two separate elements and that it would have been possible for the Council to answer the first part of the request within the cost limit. The Commissioner considers that if the Council had provided advice and assistance to the complainant this should have led the Council to fulfil part one of the request. During the Commissioner’s investigation the Council fulfilled part one of the request. The Information Tribunal has ruled on this decision and has dismissed the appeal.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 12 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 16 - Complaint Upheld - Find other matching decisions
