The complainant has requested correspondence between various individuals at Nottingham City Council and representatives of Nottinghamshire Police between October 2009 and December 1, 2010, in relation to investigations undertaken by Nottinghamshire Police and/or by the District Auditor into the misallocation of council houses in the city between 2003 and 2005. Nottingham City Council has satisfied the Commissioner on a balance of probabilities that it has identified all the recorded information falling within the scope of the complainant’s request and made appropriate disclosures. However, the Commissioner has decided that Nottingham City Council was wrong to apply section 40(2) of the Act to certain information it redacted when disclosing an email it received from Nottinghamshire Police. The Commissioner finds that Nottingham City Council has breached section 10(1) of the Act by failing to respond to the complainant’s request promptly and in any event with twenty working days but does not require any steps to be carried out in relation to this breach. The Commissioner requires the public authority to disclose the name of the elected representative.
Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 10 – Complaint Upheld, FOI 40 – Complaint Upheld
[2012] UKICO FS50400009
Bailii
England and Wales
Updated: 14 October 2021; Ref: scu.529762
