'Freedom of Information' Requests

[Homer3334]

Hi all,

 

Sorry wasn't sure where to post this exactly, don't think there's a right place for it!

 

A couple of schools we provide services for have been asked to provide the following details via Freedom of Information Act (FOI)

 

Personally I don't have an issue with this being disclosed, but the school has asked me if i could find out the legitimacy and requirement to respond. Have done lots of reading and still can't find an answer.

 

The person making the request has emailed the school(s) and asked for:

 

- Which company/who provides IT support?

- Who in the school looks after/deals with support contracts?

- At what cost?

- Renewal dates?

 

The email is from a hotmail address and is signed with a full name at the bottom.

 

I'm interested to find out if any of you have come across similar things and if anyone has information on how best to go forward? Do we need to fully comply, or partially? What does your school do?

 

Thanks

[synaesthesia]

The requirement to respond is simple, they are required, period.

[elsiegee40]

The school spends public money and therefore it must comply. Needless to say that independent schools don't have any FOI obligations.

 

Historical cost may be given, but isn't requested so I don't recommend doing so. They should only answer the questions asked. Renewal rate is quite possibly not known until negotiated.

 

You as the support company are not obliged to reply.

 

The school must reply with the information it has. Like I said the renewal rate is not known until negotiated so it is reasonable for the school to say this.

 

And yes this FOI is undoubtedly from someone touting for business. Unfortunately there is nothing the school, or you, can do about this

Edited June 12, 2017 by elsiegee40

[Achandler]

This is where the FOI requests have become a farce. Telecoms companies do it, support companies do it, every sales company now does it. Constant requests for information purely so that they can attempt to get business in the future.

 

Each request might only take an hour to complete but when schools are recieving upto 10 a week it takes up huge amounts of time dealing with them, that inevitably only result in more unwanted and unsolicated mail/ emails and phone calls. Not really what the FOI was set up for.

 

For example, who provides your support, how much is it. Totally legitimate questions, and the information should be freely available. The other two questions are purely for a commerical interest.

 

But sadly yes, you have to reply to them, you have a set time scale, normally 20 working days. Notice thats 20 working days, we have had people (aka businesses) claiming we haven't replied in time to them because it has been 3 weeks and there hasn't been a reply. It is quite amusing to send a reply saying we have 20 working days, not 20 days.

[Lonix]

You're well within your right to request an admin fee.

We do this on every FOIA request. Funnily enough not one company gave a response when we sent them an estimated cost for the admin fee. A lot of companies are using FOIA to get what they want which is how they can provide your school with IT.

A simple £40 is enough.

[Snoochieboochies]

You're well within your right to request an admin fee.

We do this on every FOIA request. Funnily enough not one company gave a response when we sent them an estimated cost for the admin fee. A lot of companies are using FOIA to get what they want which is how they can provide your school with IT.

A simple £40 is enough.

 

I think an admin fee is a fair request. If they have a legitimate need to get the information requested, they will be happy to pay it.

[FN-GM]

I would consider this commercially sensitive.

 

"By contrast, where the information requested is likely to prejudice commercial

interests, section 43 not only provides an exemption from the obligation to

communicate the information to the applicant, but can also provide an

exemption from the requirement to inform the applicant whether the

information is held."

 

https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1178/awareness_guidance_5_v3_07_03_08.pdf

[Homer3334]

Thanks everyone for amazingly quick, and detailed replies,

 

Agree with all the points here; especially that where public money is involved then it should be transparent.

 

When it comes to renewal dates and who the contact is for deciding/renewing said contracts, we all had similar thoughts here that this does sound like touting for business, and no doubt the schools will be pestered in the future with targeted marketing requests. I did think however, this might not necessarily be a bad thing if it helps keeps suppliers honest and competitive - just the method is horrible; using law to make already very busy schools take time to address marketers...

 

As you've all said however, not much we can do and will advise the school to reply with the info requested!

 

Thanks again

 

EDIT:

 

After replying I have read the latest 3 messages - this sounds like a very good route to go down. Especially Lonix hearing that your place already has this policy and is exercising it - should help weed out the insincere/unscrupulous requests at least...

Edited June 12, 2017 by Homer3334

[sparkeh]

I would consider this commercially sensitive.

 

"By contrast, where the information requested is likely to prejudice commercial

interests, section 43 not only provides an exemption from the obligation to

communicate the information to the applicant, but can also provide an

exemption from the requirement to inform the applicant whether the

information is held."

 

https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1178/awareness_guidance_5_v3_07_03_08.pdf

I don't think that would really fly in this case. If the request was to reveal the bid of company during a current tendering process then yeah I think you could certainly refuse as it damages their commercial interests.

However, once the contract has been awarded and you apply the public interest test I think the right to hold a public body's spending to account outweighs the commercial interest.

[fiza]

You're well within your right to request an admin fee.

We do this on every FOIA request. Funnily enough not one company gave a response when we sent them an estimated cost for the admin fee. A lot of companies are using FOIA to get what they want which is how they can provide your school with IT.

A simple £40 is enough.

 

I thought a fee could be charged but only to cover costs to provide the information ie photocopying/printing costs. It should not include Staff time required to comply. What would the £40 cover?

[elsiegee40]

I thought a fee could be charged but only to cover costs to provide the information ie photocopying/printing costs. It should not include Staff time required to comply. What would the £40 cover?

@GrumbleDook will confirm, but you are basically right.

 

The school, not you the contractor, must answer this

 

They may only charge reasonable admin fees for, say photocopying, not for time spent. You may not charge the fee to discourage time-wasters. This is the law not the school's choice!

 

School holidays don't count as working days.

 

The contact for all schools is usually the Business or Finance Manager so no great surprise there.

 

They ask for current contract cost which the SBM/FM should know.

 

Unless they have already negotiated a renewal cost with you then there is not necessarily an answer yet to future costs

[GrumbleDook]

Charging would be excessive for a simple query that requires no additional work and so could be trouble for you.

Who holds the contract and expiry date is a reasonable request and they have not asked for anything commercially sensitive (I.e. What systems are covered, etc.) so nothing to block there.

 

Give roles and not names, if you feel you have to, as to who looks after contracts.

[Lonix]

I thought a fee could be charged but only to cover costs to provide the information ie photocopying/printing costs. It should not include Staff time required to comply. What would the £40 cover?

 

https://ico.org.uk/media/1168/fees_cost_of_compliance_appropriate_limit.pdf

 

Check this out.

 

At the end of the day it can cover everything or not - we use it simply to find out which companies are truly after the information or simply trying to pull a fast one. As I said not one single company responded in regards to admin charges and all went quiet. A few even resorted to 'threats' on the original emails of FOIA. They too went quiet when admin fees were requested.

[fiza]

https://ico.org.uk/media/1168/fees_cost_of_compliance_appropriate_limit.pdf

 

Check this out.

 

At the end of the day it can cover everything or not - we use it simply to find out which companies are truly after the information or simply trying to pull a fast one. As I said not one single company responded in regards to admin charges and all went quiet. A few even resorted to 'threats' on the original emails of FOIA. They too went quiet when admin fees were requested.

 

I still can't see how £40 admin fee could be charged unless it actually cost £40 to produce the info. From the same document linked to;

 

What can be charged when the costs of compliance do not

exceed the appropriate limit

Regulation 6(3) states that this includes, but is not limited to, the

costs of:

 Reproducing any document containing the information, eg

printing or photocopying;

 Postage and other forms of transmitting the information; and

 Complying with section 11 of FOIA where the applicant has

expressed a preference for the means of communication and

where this is reasonably practicable.

These costs are referred to as ‘communication costs’ or

disbursements and are limited to expenses actually incurred.

[DavePa]

I've always been under the impression that the maximum you can charge to respond to an FOI request is £10. I'll try and find reference to it and update if I can.

 

Edit: Nope, can't find that anywhere but I'm sure it was in a recent document that I've seen.

 

Additional edit: £10 is the maximum you can charge for a subject access request under the data protection act. Mixing up my DPA and FOI acts!

Edited June 13, 2017 by DavePa

[sparkeh]

https://ico.org.uk/media/1168/fees_cost_of_compliance_appropriate_limit.pdf

 

Check this out.

 

At the end of the day it can cover everything or not - we use it simply to find out which companies are truly after the information or simply trying to pull a fast one. As I said not one single company responded in regards to admin charges and all went quiet. A few even resorted to 'threats' on the original emails of FOIA. They too went quiet when admin fees were requested.

But that document doesn't support your case. You can only charge for actual costs incurred (excluding staff time). And you can't charge a fee to deter people making requests.

In fact the document states the exact opposite to what you are doing

[elsiegee40]

But that document doesn't support your case. You can only charge for actual costs incurred (excluding staff time). And you can't charge a fee to deter people making requests.

In fact the document states the exact opposite to what you are doing

 

What he said

[GrumbleDook]

https://ico.org.uk/media/1168/fees_cost_of_compliance_appropriate_limit.pdf

 

Check this out.

 

At the end of the day it can cover everything or not - we use it simply to find out which companies are truly after the information or simply trying to pull a fast one. As I said not one single company responded in regards to admin charges and all went quiet. A few even resorted to 'threats' on the original emails of FOIA. They too went quiet when admin fees were requested.

 

You will eventually get someone who knows what they are doing who will report you to the ICO.

 

Whilst schools are not getting fined for DPA breaches, they are getting rapped on the knuckles for being stupid on FOI requests.

[elsiegee40]

The law is that you cannot refuse the request even when you suspect it's someone touting for business.

 

They may have broken the law, but the school is not allowed to challenge them... that is a job for our overworked police force.

 

The information requested is about an organisation spending public money and is therefore a legitimate request and must be answered within 20 working days.

 

The rules on charging are equally clear. This information is public information. Public bodies may find such requests a nuisance, but that's tough.

[Lonix]

But that document doesn't support your case. You can only charge for actual costs incurred (excluding staff time). And you can't charge a fee to deter people making requests.

In fact the document states the exact opposite to what you are doing

 

Well at the end of the day take the advice or not. Charge an admin fee or not. It's either that or you can spend the time constantly answering companies trying to swindle you.

 

It states you can't use it to cover the hours (I actually missed that part) but it doesn't state that you can't charge admin fees for other reasons e.g. communication/paper usage.

 

This isn't about supporting my case this was about helping some one read the information. We charge an admin fee and as I said not one single company has come back.

[Primus]

No, it's about following the law or not, you can't do what you are advising others to do and, as has been pointed out, sooner or later you will get reported to the ICO for this.

 

I would not want to be responsible for the school getting an official telling off from the ICO or even worse, being made out to be an example if the ICO gets fed up of schools not following the law in this area.

[sparkeh]

Well at the end of the day take the advice or not. Charge an admin fee or not. It's either that or you can spend the time constantly answering companies trying to swindle you.

 

It states you can't use it to cover the hours (I actually missed that part) but it doesn't state that you can't charge admin fees for other reasons e.g. communication/paper usage.

 

This isn't about supporting my case this was about helping some one read the information. We charge an admin fee and as I said not one single company has come back.

Sure, but we also have to point out what the actual rules are as people following your advice are breaking the law.

[GrumbleDook]

Well at the end of the day take the advice or not. Charge an admin fee or not. It's either that or you can spend the time constantly answering companies trying to swindle you.

 

It states you can't use it to cover the hours (I actually missed that part) but it doesn't state that you can't charge admin fees for other reasons e.g. communication/paper usage.

 

This isn't about supporting my case this was about helping some one read the information. We charge an admin fee and as I said not one single company has come back.

 

You are a public body and cannot make a profit from doing your legal obligation of responding, so it has to be at cost.

 

Because of that, there is no way you can set a flat fee, it will differ every time.

 

If you over charge then you are at risk of complaints being raised and you being fined by the ICO.

 

Your advice for charging in such a manner is incorrect and if others follow it they are at risk of being fined too.