More interesting stuff from Notts scammers

[DeltaFox]

www.streettactics.co.uk/FOI/pubscheme.pdf

www.streettactics.co.uk/FOI/opcase0405/0405_marketing_strategy.pdf

www.streettactics.co.uk/FOI/Steering_Group_Minutes/July_2004_SGMinutes.pdf

www.streettactics.co.uk/FOI/Marktrsrchpdfs/Jan2003.pdf

www.streettactics.co.uk/FOI/decisionmaking.pdf

www.streettactics.co.uk/FOI/Steering_Group_Minutes/Nov_2004_SGMinutes.pdf

www.streettactics.co.uk/FOI/opcase2000.pdf

www.streettactics.co.uk/FOI/dealingwithrequests.pdf

www.streettactics.co.uk/FOI/Steering_Group_Minutes/Oct_2004_SGMinutes.pdf

www.streettactics.co.uk/FOI/Memoofunderstanding.pdf

www.streettactics.co.uk/FOI/FOI_complaints_procedure.pdf

www.streettactics.co.uk/FOI/Steering_Group_Minutes/ACCRONYMS.htm


Enough there to be going on with i think...

[james_j]

Interesting, thanks.

The "complaints procedure" file may be useful...

Also, it was interesting to see the following with regard to their concerns for requests under the Freedom of Information Act:

"...As part of the process of determining this policy, Partnerships raised concerns relating to three areas of information: details of enforcement thresholds; information that could be used to deduce enforcement activity at specific sites or routes; and information that could jeopardise the safety or security of Partnership staff or assets..."

So they would like their activities to remain covert. I wonder why. I also wonder why the government wishes to ban radar and laser detectors...

..and no, they've thought of appeals re information they won't release (see above) - an appeal won't work. Surprise surprise.

[tja]

There's an interesting table in "0405_marketing_strategy.pdf" on the righthand side of page 9.

Looks like the public attitude to gatsos is getting more anti-camera.

[Munta]

FOI Complaints procedure.

What a wonderful get out clause.

“A request is considered vexatious when any of the following criteria are fulfilled –

• A request which is substantially similar in content to a previous request made by that person.
• A request identical in detail except for the timescale covered by the information requested.
• A request identical or substantially similar to a number of other requests made on that subject within a limited time period.
• A repeated request for information when the requestor has been informed that the information is available elsewhere.”

So the Notts police force ask the partnership for all the information on cameras. Then the Partnership ask the police force for all the information on cameras.

A MOP asks the partnership for the information and is directed to the police (as they have already received this info). The MOP then asks the Police and is directed back to the partnership for the same reason.

[Peter Ward]

james_j said:

Interesting, thanks. The "complaints procedure" file may be useful... Also, it was interesting to see the following with regard to their concerns for requests under the Freedom of Information Act: "...As part of the process of determining this policy, Partnerships raised concerns relating to three areas of information: details of enforcement thresholds; information that could be used to deduce enforcement activity at specific sites or routes; and information that could jeopardise the safety or security of Partnership staff or assets..." So they would like their activities to remain covert. I wonder why. I also wonder why the government wishes to ban radar and laser detectors... ..and no, they've thought of appeals re information they won't release (see above) - an appeal won't work. Surprise surprise.

So we're not allowed to find out where they're doing their enforcement? So we can ignore anything given out on the radio or on their website about where their vans are today then?