Parking Ticket Thomas Keig Est

Authority	Department of Infrastructure
Date received	2017-03-27
Outcome	Not required to fulfill request
Outcome date	2017-03-29
Case ID	355787

Summary

The Department of Infrastructure refused a request for information regarding parking tickets issued to Thomas Keig Est, citing that the data constitutes personal information and that compiling the requested details would require extensive analysis not mandated by the Act.

Key Facts

Four parking tickets were issued to the estate in question.
The authority does not record the information in a format that allows for easy retrieval without extensive analysis.
Disclosure of officer names was refused due to potential risk to staff and personal data protections.
No written instructions exist for estates regarding the specific complaint context.
The Freedom of Information Act only applies to information created on or after 11th October 2011.

Data Disclosed

355787
2017-03-29
2017-03-27
5
1
Four
11th October 2011
IM1 2RF

Exemptions Cited

Section 39(1)(a) - Personal data of which the applicant is not the data subject
Section 8 of the Data Protection Act 2002 - Processing likely to cause damage or distress
Section 11(2)(b) - Practical refusal (not required to create or derive information)
Section 4(1) - Act applies only to information created after 11th October 2011
Section 25(2)(a) - Absolutely exempt personal information
Section 11(3)(a) - Information not held or cannot be found

Data Tables (1)

Full Response Text

Under section 39(1)(a) “information is qualified exempt if it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is not the data subject; and (b) under section 8 of the Data Protection Act 2002 (processing likely to cause damage or distress), the data subject would be entitled to prevent disclosure of the information to a member of the public otherwise than under this Act.”

The information requested is in Appendix 1.
Four tickets were issued.
In this instance we do not record the information in a format that allows us to answer this question without extensive analysis.

Had we been able to supply the information, we would only be obliged to do so from the 11th October 2011.

Under section 11(2)(b) of the Act – a practical refusal reason referencing s8(3), the Act states that “a public authority is not required to create or derive information from the information that it holds; undertake research into, or analysis of, information that it holds; or undertake substantial compilation or collation of information that it holds”

Under section 4(1) of the Act – this Act applies in relation to information created on or AFTER 11th October 2011.

As in question 1, supplying an officer’s name (which is personal data) could have the potential to put them at risk. For that reason, and because our officers are simply following standard procedures, we do not disclose this information.

Under sections 25(2)(a) of the Act “information is absolutely exempt personal information if it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is not the data subject; and (b)(i) falls within section 1(1)(a-d) … of the Data Protection Act 2002”

No written instruction exists for estates; in this instance we were responding to a complaint.

Under sections 11(3)(a) of the Act (practical refusal), “the public authority does not hold or cannot… find the information that the applicant has requested”

As stated in question 6, no written instruction exists for estates, and we do not record information about parking complaints in a format that allows us to answer this question without extensive analysis. Again, we would not have been obliged to supply any of this information (if it had been held) prior to 11th October 2011.

Under sections 11(3)(a) of the Act (practical refusal), “the public authority does not hold or cannot… find the information that the applicant has requested”

Under section 4(1) of the Act – this Act applies in relation to information created on or AFTER 11th October 2011.

The Departments formal complaints procedure can be found at the following link https://www.gov.im/about-the-government/departments/infrastructure/

Your right to request a review

If you are unhappy with this response to your Freedom of Information request, you may ask us to carry out an internal review of the response, by completing a complaint form and submitting it electronically to foi.doi@gov.im or by delivery/post to Mr Ian Harris, Department of Infrastructure, Sea Terminal Buildings, Douglas, IM1 2RF. An electronic version and paper version of our complaint form can be found by going to our website at https://www.gov.im/about-the-government/freedom-of-information/

Your review request should explain why you are dissatisfied with this response, and should be made as soon as practicable. We will respond as soon as the review has been concluded.

If you are not satisfied with the result of the review, you then have the right to appeal to the Information Commissioner for a decision on;

1 Whether we have responded to your request for information in accordance with Part 2 of the Freedom of Information Act; or

2 Whether we are justified in refusing to give you the information requested.

In response to an application for review, the Information Commissioner may, at any time, attempt to resolve a matter by negotiation, conciliation, mediation or another form of alternative dispute resolution and will have regard to any outcome of this in making any subsequent decision. More detailed information on your rights to review is on the Information Commissioner’s website at: www.inforights.im/

Should you have any queries concerning this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Further information about Freedom of Information requests can be found at https://www.gov.im/about-the-government/freedom-of-information/

APPENDIX 1