Information Commissioners Office Update

 I sent the below to the Information Commissioner's Office today. I will write further when i have news.

Andy Walker

120 Blythswood Road

Ilford

IG3 8SG 07956 263088 or 020 8590 7739

Information Commissioner's Office 26^th March 2025 Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF

Dear Sir or Madam

1) Cllr Athwal's Managing Agents

2) Notices to landlord

3) Cllr Athwal Investigation

4) Request for correspondence by post rather than email for this and another two ongoing requests relating to Jas Athwal MP

Cllr Athwal's Managing Agents commenced 11^th October 2024

I cut and paste my request to Redbridge Council dated 11^th October 2024 below:

“Dear Redbridge Borough Council,

I seek copies of all correspondence between Cllr Athwal's managing agents and Redbridge Council from the 1st January 2024 to the 10th October 2024 under the environmental information regulations or if you say these do not apply then then freedom of information regulations.

Yours faithfully,

Andy Walker” ENDS request dated 11^th October 2024

This email and all other correspondence is at my What do they Know Wall

Redbridge Council wrote to me on the 18^th November to decline my request which I attach.

I cut and past below my request for an internal review also dated 18^th November 2024

“Dear Redbridge Borough Council,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Redbridge Borough Council's handling of my FOI request 'Cllr Athwal's Managing Agents'.

"The Council can neither confirm nor deny that it holds the information relevant to your request as
the duty in section 1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“FOIA”) does not apply by virtue
of the following exemptions upon which this Council relies: Section 40(2) FOIA (personal
information about a third party); and Section 40(5B)."

While I maintain my entire my entire request, I say that at the very least the council has a public interest duty to supply the dates of any correspondence between the Council and Cllr Athwal's managing agents.

My grounds are as follows:

1) Using both Freedom of Information law and the obligation upon the Council under the Aarhus Convention the council;s must submit to the overarching objective of justice in this case, in this case, justice for vulnerable tenants who are also part of the environment.
2) By refusing to disclose dates of correspondence, how can vulnerable tenants and taxpayers know if the Council has been its job properly in response to the BBC reporting that Cllr Athwal's flats are sub-standard when it comes to mould and other issues.
3) If the position of Redbridge is to be maintained it will undermine confidence in Redbridge Council as an enforcement authority. By now, I would have expected Cllr Athwal to be have fined because of the tests outlined in the judgment made by Martin Rodger QC of July 29th of 2021

. Namely, (A) Cllr Athwal or his agent would have know they needed a licence
(B) Cllr Athwal has 15 properties, being a multi-property landlord is a factor for a prosecution.
(C) His flats were sub-standard, another factor for a prosecution.
4) On the face of it, the crime of misconduct in public office has taken place by not prosecuting and potentially, if found in due, no investigation at all taking place into Cllr Athwal and his managing agent, the public have a right to information to uncover a crime.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

Yours faithfully,

Andy Walker” ENDS INTERNAL REVIEW REQUEST DATED 18TH NOVEMBER 2024

I seek you instruct Redbridge Council to provide an internal review within whatever time frame you think best.

================================================================================================================================

2) Notices to landlord commenced 2^nd December 2024

I cut and paste my request to Redbridge Council dated 2^nd December 2024 below:

Dear Redbridge Borough Council,

An article at https://propertyindustryeye.com/fines-fo... entitled "Fines for non-compliant landlords exceeds £10m in London
April 10, 2024 in Property Industry Eye| Marc da Silva" writes

"Redbridge Council have also revealed the results of their enforcement efforts from recent licensing measures, with 3,000 notices served..."

I seek under the environmental regulations or freedom of information law.

1) How many notices were issued to selective licence landlords for the period 1st July 2024 to 1st December 2024 including their dates of issue.

2) The names of the landlords or their managing agents.

3) The contents of the notice.

The grounds for issuing notices are set out in the Redbridge "Private Sector Housing Enforcement Policy" 2023.

If you feel you you cannot release all the information, then please send what you believe your duty is to disclose.

Yours faithfully,

Andy Walker ENDS request dated 2^nd December 2024

Redbridge Council released some information in reply in a letter dated 9^th January 2025 which I attach.

I requested an internal dated 22^nd January 2025

“Dear Redbridge Borough Council,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews. I am writing to request an internal review of Redbridge Borough Council's handling of my FOI request 'Notices to landlord'.

Thank you for your reply in which you state:
"148 notices were issued to selective licence landlords between the 1st July and 1st December
2024."

I note you refuse to supply the names of the landlords, how are potential tenants to know if landlords are complying with their duties if their names are not published? It must be in the public interest for these landlords to be named as part of the drive to improve rental standards in the private sector.

Naming the landlords and the contents of the notice will also hold the authority to account as it would provide an incentive the Council to keep on top of repairs required in a timely manor. Should the data I seek be published periodically it would help encourage competition between London Boroughs to who has the best quality private rental stock.

I expect Cllr Jas Athwal MP to have got a notice within this period, if not it may be helpful to the gathering evidence for a misconduct in public office charge.

I hope you will grant my appeal in due course.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/n...

Yours faithfully,

Andy Walker”

Redbridge Council provided an internal review dated 5^th February which I attach. I main my original arguments in my request of 2^nd December 2025 and request you make a judgment in due course about whether further disclosure is required.

================================================================================================================================

3) Cllr Athwal Investigation commenced 26^th October 2024

I cut and paste my request to Redbridge Council dated 26^th October 2024 below:

“Dear Redbridge Borough Council,

In an email dated 24th October your monitoring officer wrote to me concerning Cllr Athwal as follows:

"Thank you for your e-mail. The Council applies its policies and procedures appropriately and consistently, this includes the consistent application of residents’ general right to confidentiality. Your reference to an apparent offence of misconduct in public office is baseless and without merit and will not be commented on further." ENDS QUOTE

I seek all emails from senior staff about whether an investigation into whether Cllr Athwal should be commenced about him not holding a landlord licence as reported by the BBC earlier this year.

I expect the staff to include the monitoring officer, the Chief Executive, the Leader of the Council and the Head of the selective landlord licencing department.

I say the Nolan principles in public life mean these emails should be published in the public interest.

Regards

Andy Walker” ENDS REQUEST

I attach the Redbridge response to me dated 18^th November 2024 declining my request.

I cut and paste my request for an internal review dated 22 November 2024

“Dear London Borough of Redbridge,

You write as grounds for refusal

"The Council can neither confirm nor deny that it holds the information relevant to your request as
the duty in section 1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“FOIA”) does not apply by virtue
of the following exemptions: s30(3) FOIA; s40(2) and 40(5B) FOIA. "

In addition to the points made in my original application, I say Redbridge officers have a duty to release information relating to a potential crime, namely misconduct in public office.

I say the Council should have sent inspectors to Jas Athwal's flats when the BBC story broke. These emails are likely to prove the criminal conspiracy I seek to prove beyond reasonable doubt because they are likely to be supportive to my argument.

Yours sincerely,

Andy Walker”

I sent a further email on the 22^nd November 2024

“Dear London Borough of Redbridge,

In addition to my internal review request, I also say the Aarhus convention compels Redbridge to divulge critical information relating to enforcing laws designed to protect the environment.

Yours sincerely,

Andy Walker”

I sent another email chasing for an internal review dated 2^nd January 2025

Dear London Borough of Redbridge,

Your internal review appears late without reasonable excuse. I quote from ICO guidance below. Unless a reasonable excuse for the delay or a substantive response is provided by you by the 9th January, I will write to the ICO seeking their assistance for the information I seek.

ICO Guidance is below:

"In view of all the above the Commissioner considers that a reasonable time
for completing an internal review is 20 working days from the date of the
request for review. There may be a small number of cases which involve
exceptional circumstances where it may be reasonable to take longer. In
those circumstances, the public authority should, as a matter of good
practice, notify the requester and explain why more time is needed.
In our view, in no case should the total time taken exceed 40 working days.
In such cases we would expect a public authority to be able to demonstrate
that it had commenced the review procedure promptly following receipt of
the request for review and had actively worked on the review throughout
that period. "

Yours sincerely,

Andy Walker”ENDS

I have not had a reply from Redbridge. I seek an order from your office for an internal review to be provided by Redbridge.

I say the Heather Brooke case over MP expenses is the authority to follow in all the above. Essentially, law makers must follow the regulations set in Nolan Principles for public life which stress accountability and transparency which requires disclosure.

===============================================================================================================================

Request for correspondence by post rather than email for this and another two ongoing requests relating to Jas Athwal MP

I made a recent request for two other freedom of information/environmental regulations requests to dealt with by post rather than by email. I make the same request for the three requests above.

All three requests are at my What do they Know Wall

Regards

Andy Walker

Attached: 18 November 2024 refusal letter from Redbridge Council referring to my request: “Cllr Athwal's Managing Agents”

Attached: 9^th January 2025 refusal letter from Redbridge Council referring to my request: “Notices to landlord”

Attached: 5^th February 2025 internal review letter from Redbridge Council referring to my request: “Notices to landlord”

Attached: 18^th November 2024 refusal letter from Redbridge Council referring to my request: “Cllr Athwal Investigation”