FOI request (FOIR-243122424)

Rocklands Enforcement complaints EN/19/306

Requested Fri 28 August 2020
Responded Mon 19 October 2020

Enforcement complaints have been raised concerning unauthorised retaining walls/excavations (EN/19/306) and unauthorised balcony works (EN/20/76) - despite frequent requests for an update from HBC no further information has been supplied on the status of the requests since the Planning Officer dealing with the requests left HBC employ.

Please supply the following information for EN/19/306 and EN/20/76:

1. A record of site visit dates by HBC officers including date of visit, name of officers and any site visit notes taken.

2. Copies of all correspondence in any format between Rocklands and HBC concerning these enforcement issues.

This information is relevant to Planning Application HS/FA/20/00470.

Please be aware that this is an open planning application and the clock has already started ticking. Please provide this information ASAP so that it can be used in any public comments on the application.

Response

Please accept my apologies for the delay in responding.

NOTICE OF REFUSAL

Under Environmental Information Regulations the information you have requested relating to Rocklands Enforcement complaints EN/19/306 is being refused under Exception 12(5)(b) 'The course of justice and inquiries'.

The course of justice has a wide meaning which includes material covered by Law enforcement, investigations and proceedings.

This exception 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:

a. Transparency and accountability.

Factors against disclosure:

a. Protecting information that has been acquired during investigations.

b. Correspondence contains confidential information.

c. The significance and sensitivity of the information.

d. Consideration of options and the exchange of views within a 'safe space'.

e. Maintaining the confidentiality of discussions in the interest of good governance and the perceived threat to candour and boldness in the giving of advice.