FOI request (FOI-95551230)

Removal of caravans on the lower slopes

Requested Tue 13 November 2018
Responded  Thu 04 April 2019

In a statement to the Ombudsman in September 2016 the HBC Chief Legal officer stated:

"In regard to the lowers slopes - the Council got the caravans moved with immediate effect..."

We require clarification on this statement. It is our understanding that the caravans on the lower slopes were not moved with immediate effect at all.

It is our understanding that a PCN was not issued until many months had passed and that HBC did not take any enforcement action to remove the caravans.

It seems that the caravans were removed because of the threat of the landslip and not by any actions taken by HBC.

Could you please provide the following information to clarify the situation:

1. On what date did HBC become aware of the landslip that threatened the row of caravans?

2. On what date did HBC recognise that the caravans were installed without any planning permission?

3. On what date did HBC recognise that the caravans were installed in breach of planning conditions?

4. On what date did HBC recognise that the caravans were installed in breach of licence conditions?

5. On what date was a Planning Contravention Notice issued for the caravans?

6. On what date was an Enforcement Notice issued for removal of the caravans?

7. On what date was the last caravan removed?

8. What period of time does the Chief Legal Officer consider to be "immediate effect"?

9. Please provide copies of correspondence between HBC and Rocklands concerning the removal of caravans.

Response

Please accept my apologies for the delay in responding.

1. On what date did HBC become aware of the landslip that threatened the row of caravans?

No specific date held but in December 2013

2. On what date did HBC recognise that the caravans were installed without any planning permission?

No date held - The issue was recognised in a letter dated 24 April 2014 following a site visit.

3. On what date did HBC recognise that the caravans were installed in breach of planning conditions?

Please see response to Q2

4. On what date did HBC recognise that the caravans were installed in breach of licence conditions?

The date licensing became aware of breaches to licence conditions was 20th August 2014, when the independent audit was carried out.

5. On what date was a Planning Contravention Notice issued for the caravans?

08/10/14

6. On what date was an Enforcement Notice issued for removal of the caravans?

An enforcement notice was not issued.

7. On what date was the last caravan removed?

Information not held

8. What period of time does the Chief Legal Officer consider to be "immediate effect"?

Information not held, this is not a request for recorded information.

9. Please provide copies of correspondence between HBC and Rocklands concerning the removal of caravans.

NOTICE OF REFUSAL

Under Environmental Information Regulations the information requested above is exempt under Section 12(5)(e) "Confidentiality of commercial or industrial information where such confidentiality is provided by law to protect a legitimate economic interest"

We have considered the following:

a. Is the information commercial or industrial?

b. Is the information subject to confidentiality provided by law?

c. Is the confidentiality protecting a legitimate economic interest?

d. Would disclosure adversely affect the confidentiality?

We believe that the disclosure of this information is more likely to have an adverse effect on the economic interest of the owners of Rocklands Caravan Park.

Section 12(5)(e) is subject to a public interest test. This means that a public authority can refuse to disclose information under these exceptions if in all the circumstances of the case the public interest in maintaining the exception outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

Factors for disclosure:

1. Transparency and accountability

Factors against disclosure:

1. If the information is disclosed it could be used to seek harm on the owners commercial interests.

2. The release of this information could lead to further harassment to the owners causing undue upset and worry.

3. Were such information disclosed, then it could be used by competitors and potential purchasers to the owners financial detriment.

4. Maintaining commercial confidences.