FS50072107: Difference between revisions

From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
CSV import
 
XML import
Line 1: Line 1:
{{DNSummaryBox
{{DNSummaryBox
|dn_ref=FS50072107
|dn_ref=FS50072107
|dn_date=09/11/2005
|dn_date=09/11/2005
|dn_pa=Home Office
|dn_pa=Home Office
|dn_summary=The complainant requested information relating to investigations carried out into the conduct of prison staff. The complaints to the Information Commissioner were that the request was not responded to within 20 working days (section 10), that the Home Office stated incorrectly that the cost of complying with the request would exceed the central government cost�limit of �600 (section 12).�However, since�the Home Office did not help to refine the request and did not offer any information�about their cost estimate the Commissioner believes that the Home Office failed to offer advice and assistance (section 16). Therefore the Commissioner made a decision on three issues; upholding complaints regarding the time for compliance and provision of advice and assistance and not upholding the complaint regarding the application of the Act when calculating the cost estimate.
|dn_summary=n on three issues; upholding complaints regarding the time for compliance and provision of advice and assistance and not upholding the complaint regarding the application of the Act when calculating the cost estimate.
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2005/decision_notice_72107.pdf
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2005/decision_notice_72107.pdf
}}
}}
{{DNDecision
{{DNDecision
|1=FOI 16
|dnd_section=FOI 10
|2=Upheld
|dnd_finding=Upheld
}}
{{DNDecision
|dnd_section=FOI 12
|dnd_finding=Not upheld
}}
{{DNDecision
|dnd_section=FOI 16
|dnd_finding=Upheld
}}
}}

Revision as of 20:25, 3 May 2010


Decision Summary

  • Case Ref: FS50072107
  • Date: 09/11/2005
  • Public Authority: Home Office
  • Summary: n on three issues; upholding complaints regarding the time for compliance and provision of advice and assistance and not upholding the complaint regarding the application of the Act when calculating the cost estimate.
  • View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]