More Kafkaesque Excuses from SABP over FOIA Delays, Ommissions & Abuse

According to Elaine Gould Head of Healthcare Services at Surrey & Borders Partnership Trust I am somehow responsible for the delays, ommissions and abuse her Trust applied to my FOIA requests.

Even so, Elaine is very quick to professionally reassure me that this matter is still being treated as a formal complaint even though if it is this complaint dating from February 2nd according to Ms Gould, has also ran some weeks over the time the NHS formally allots for dealing with complaints.

Still, lets not get bogged down with such minor contradictory details as in stark contrast to the official delaying tactics used against service users requesting information , the Surrey & Borders Partnership NHS Trust management clearly can act quickly when it wants to , as evidenced by Trust CEO Fiona Edwards and her husband very hastilly co-ordinating the removal of her Trust's name from his company's SOFTOOLS website in a couple of hours when I pointed out the obvious conflict of interest in Mr Edwards firm using the Trust managed by his wife to drum up business.

Still, we all tend to prioritise family matters over trivial work issues dont we...

Now if you dont mind Ms Edwards could you please provide the address of your accounts department , the third time I have asked for this information as an FOIA request, and leave it to the Courts to decide whether I have a legal right to submit an invoice and claim for the deliberate and completely unnecessary costs your Trust has imposed on me.

All monies recovered will be donated to a small local charity

Regards

Des Curley

Kingsfield Resource Centre

Philanthropic road

Redfhill

Surrey

RH1 4DP


Mr Des Curley

15th March 2007


Dear Mr Curley

I have been asked to review your Freedom of Information Act requests made to the Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Trust (the “Trust”), as was indicated to you in the letters from Fiona Edwards dated 2 February and 7 February 2007.

I am the Head of Healthcare Systems at the Trust and I have been asked to review, on appeal, your previous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) queries made to the Trust.

I have reviewed your previous FOIA requests dating back to mid 2006 and note that you have had a full response to the majority of these requests. I note from your correspondence with the Trust that you have not taken issue with information provided under these previous FOIA requests, but that you have made a formal complaint about the way in which your FOIA queries were dealt with.

From my review of the papers, there are three outstanding e-mails regarding your FOIA requests which have not yet been dealt with. These are your e-mails dated 24 November 2006, 5 February 2007 and 6 February 2007. Please find my response to these requests below;


1. E-mail requests



I have reviewed the file in relation to your three e-mails detailed above. I note from your e-mail dated 24 December 2006 that you have requested clarification that you had previously contacted Ms Young regarding your Freedom of Information requests. I have looked back at the correspondence in relation to this request and note that you did indeed e-mail Ms W Cox about this matter on 22 November 2006.

I understand from your e-mail that you were unhappy with Ms Young’s comments in the letter to Ms Goble dated 21 December 2006. After reading the letter I fear there may have been a misunderstanding in relation to Ms Young’s letter. Ms Young’s letter had been a response to Ms Goble’s FOIA query and her letter was stating that without consent from you, she would be unable to comment on your FOIA query.

Ms Young’s letter does incorrectly state that she had not received a response from you, for which I apologise. I do not feel Ms Young was trying to be misleading or obstructive in her response to Ms Goble or to yourself, as if she had released information about your request, she may have been in breach of the Data Protection Act.

( Damn, the Data Protection Act forced Jo Young to lie about not receiving a response from me....that makes sense...)

I understand that Ms Goble and yourself work for the same campaign, however Ms Young would still have required your explicit consent before releasing any information about your query.

As your most recent e-mails do not make any requests for new information, I would conclude that your requests for information have been dealt with, and the Trust are now to deal with your formal complaint about the way in which your requests were handled

2. Formal Complaint



Ms Edwards’ letter dated 2 February 2007 does correctly state that FOIA requests fall outside the scope of the NHS (Complaints) Regulations. Your email and following correspondence all make reference to a formal complaint about the way your requests were handled, rather than to you being dissatisfied with the information you were given.


I note that there was some initial delay in responding to your queries for which I apologise, however the Trust have provided you with the information which you have requested.


For your reference, I understand that this formal complaint is being dealt with and you will be contacted as soon as the complaint has been fully investigated.



3. Questions to the Board



I note from your e-mail dated 22 November 2006 that you were still awaiting the response to some questions which you forwarded to the Trust Board. I have looked into this matter and I note that you submitted some questions to the Trust Board Meeting dated 28 September 2006. The minutes of that meeting show however that your questions were addressed and answered in full.

4. Invoices sent to the Trust



I also note that you have several times requested an address to which you could invoice the Trust for the time spent on your FOIA queries. The FOIA does not permit applicants to charge Public Authorities for their time spent in preparing their request. I apologise for the fact that we cannot comply with your invoice, and I apologise for the fact that this was not made clear to you from the start, however there is no legal right under which you can charge the Trust for your time.

5. Conclusion



I now consider that all of your requests for information have been dealt with. Should you disagree, kindly set out the information, which you have previously requested, on which you have not received a response. If there is any information that you still require, the Trust will of course do all that it can to provide it to you.

With regard to your formal complaint (made 24 December 2006) about the manner in which your FOIA requests have been handled, the Trust will contact you as soon as you as they have completed the investigation.

Should you wish to appeal against the decisions made by the Trust in providing you with information, please write to the following address:

The Information Commissioner's Office,

Wycliffe House,

Water Lane,

Wilmslow,

Cheshire,

SK9 5AF



Yours sincerely



Elaine Gould

Head of Healthcare Systems