The DWP say that "expenses, commission" in the header of Regulation 13 are deducted under Regulation 14. But in this case they would need to be disaggregated from other pension business which they do not seem to be on Form 43. ^{x x}

Appendix 1

"Details of the problem"

I am complaining about repeated delays (over 20 working days) in replying to my emails

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/reason_for_response_to_building

I wrote to my MP Davuid Lepper about this on 15th November, but this should not be necessary. I applied for an internal review on 18th November , with no response (by 4th January). I asked how long the internal review would take on 4th January, with again no response. I responded to the Building Britain's Future consultation myself, and was restricted to 1000 characters. I raised this in a discussion:

http://boards.fool.co.uk/Message.asp?mid=11603739

18th January 2010

Dear Mr Wynn Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act)

Your information request to the Cabinet Office Thank you for your correspondence dated 6 January 2010 in which you complain about the Cabinet Office’s failure to respond to your information request within 20 working days and state that you are still awaiting a decision regarding the internal review you requested on 18 November 2009. As the Cabinet Office did not respond to your request for information within twenty working days a clear breach of the Act did occur. In cases such as this the Commissioner does not consider that serving a formal decision notice would serve any strong public interest. However, I have written to the public authority reminding it of its responsibilities and referring it to the Information Commissioner’s guidance. I enclose a copy of my letter for your information.

As you will see even though the Commissioner does not intend to issue a formal notice in this case, your concerns have been taken seriously. Thank you for bringing this matter to the attention of the Information Commissioner. Internal Review You also complain about the time taken for the Cabinet Office to carry out the internal review you requested on 18 November 2009. The right to complain to the Information Commissioner is given under section 50 of the Act. However, a complaint may be deemed ineligible under section 50, if for example: * there is an undue delay before bringing a complaint to our attention, or
* you have not exhausted any complaints procedure which is provided by the public authority. Therefore, before accepting complaints, the Commissioner generally expects complainants to allow public authorities the opportunity to respond to their appeal for a review of the handling of or decision regarding their FOI request. Although there is no statutory time set out in the Act within which public authorities must complete a review, the Commissioner has issued guidance on this matter (Good Practice Guidance 5). The Commissioner considers that a reasonable time for completing an internal review is 20 working days from the date of the request for review, and in no case should the total time taken exceed 40 working days. As you will see from my letter to the Cabinet Office I have provided them with a copy of your request for internal review and recommend that they issue you with an internal review decision within 20 working days from the date of receipt of our letter.

Significant or repeated unreasonable delays in dealing with internal reviews by public authorities are monitored and where appropriate further action may be taken. This case has now been closed, however if you do not receive a response within 20 working days please contact us quoting the reference number on this letter. If you remain dissatisfied after having exhausted the Cabinet Office’s internal review process and would like us to look into the matter, please contact us quoting the reference number on this letter and providing us with a copy of the internal review decision. If we can be of any further assistance please contact our Helpline on 08456 30 60 60 or 01625 545745 if you would prefer to call a national rate number, quoting your case reference number. You may also find some useful information on our website at www.ico.gov.uk. Yours sincerely FoI Case Reception Unit 18th January 2010

Dear Sir/Madam Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the FOIA) Complaint from Mr Stephen Wynn Request for information dated 8 July 2009 and reiterated on 7 August 2009 and 28 September 2009 The Information Commissioner has received a complaint from Mr Wynn stating that having made an information request on 8 July 2009 no response was received until 17 November 2009. Mr Wynn’s request for information was as follows:

“What is Mark's email address? Emails are requested.” This request was made as part of a series of correspondence between the complainant and the Cabinet Office which is available at the following link: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/reason_for_response_to_building As you will be aware, a public authority in receipt of such a request has a duty to deal with them promptly and, in any event, within 20 working days. Although there are some exceptions, particularly where additional time is required to consider the public interest in disclosing exempt information; none of these exceptions appear to apply in this case. The Commissioner recognises that in this particular instance you have acknowledged the breach and apologised for the delay. He does not consider, therefore, that there is any strong public interest in issuing a decision notice. He does, however, draw your attention to his published guidance on this matter (http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/freedom_of_information/detailed_specialist_guides/awareness_guidance_11_-_time_for_compliance.pdf) Internal Review Mr Wynn has also stated that he has not received a decision regarding the internal review he requested on 18 November 2009. We attach copies of Mr Wynn’s internal review requests for your information. Guidance The Commissioner has issued guidance regarding the time limits on carrying out internal reviews (Good Practice Guidance 5). The Commissioner considers that a reasonable time for completing an internal review is 20 working days from the date of the request for review, and in no case should the total time taken exceed 40 working days. A full copy of this guidance is available on our website (www.ico.gov.uk) under the Freedom of Information guidance section. http://www.ico.gov.uk/what_we_cover/freedom_of_information/guidance.aspx Enforcement The Commissioner wants to ensure that a complainant has exhausted a public authority’s internal review procedure, but at the same time the complainant should not be unreasonably delayed in having his complaint considered under section 50. Internal reviews are referred to in the section 45 Code of Practice, and significant or repeated unreasonable delays in dealing with internal reviews will be monitored by the Enforcement team. In some instances structured intervention, for example the issuing of a Practice Recommendation, may be necessary. More detail about the Commissioner’s enforcement strategy is available on our website under the Freedom of Information enforcement section. http://www.ico.gov.uk/what_we_cover/freedom_of_information/enforcement.aspx Actions As it appears that you have not issued an internal review decision to Mr Wynn we recommend that you do so within 20 working days from the date of receipt of this letter. If you have, in fact, already responded to Mr Wynn, and believe that your response should already have been received we would recommend you contact them to confirm receipt if you have not already done so. If you need to contact us about this complaint please quote the reference number at the top of this letter. Yours sincerely FoI Case Officer
FoI Case Reception Unit
The Information Commissioner’s Office

2 March 2010

Dear Mr Wynn

Your information request to Cabinet Office

Thank you for your correspondence dated 22 February 2010 in which you state that you have still not received a response to your request for internal review from the Cabinet Office.

Your case has been allocated to one of our case resolution teams who will contact you as soon as possible to explain how your complaint will be progressed.

The Information Commissioner’s Office is an independent public body set up to promote public access to official information. We will rule on eligible complaints from people who are unhappy with the way public authorities have handled requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

If you need to contact us about any aspect of your complaint please contact our Freedom of Information Helpline on 0303 123 1113, being sure to quote the reference number at the top of this letter.

Yours sincerely,

FoI Triage Team Leader

Appendix 2

17th February 2010.

Dear Information Commissioner,

I am dissatisfied with the outcome of my Freedom of Information request to the Serious Fraud Office on:

www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/how_are_my_three_cases_progre...

This is entitled “How are my three cases progressing?”. I had been informed these were being “reviewed”. But following my request I spoke to the SFO and they had apparently done exactly nothing. Saying for months that cases are being “reviewed”, and actually doing nothing seems to be just prevarication.

The letter of Kathleen Harris of 10 February 2010 says the SF0 holds information which is not in the public domain and releasing this “would prejudice our ability to conduct effective investigations, and where appropriate prosecutions, in the future”. But Equitable Life closed to new business in December 2000. So the SFO has had ample time, that is ten years, to conduct such an investigation and has not done so. It said on its website in 2005:

“The Serious Fraud Office confirms that nothing has emerged which would justify a full criminal investigation in to the affairs of the Equitable Life Assurance Society.”.

www.sfo.gov.uk/press-room/latest-press-releases/press-releas...

It is unreasonable for the SFO not to disclose information on the grounds that this would prejudice a future prosecution, when there have been no such prosecutions for ten years, and it has apparently no intention of ever prosecuting, and has not even started a “full criminal investigation”. Such prevarication is surely not in the public interest.

Yours sincerely,

Stephen Wynn.

With reply on 8th March:

"Your case has been allocated to one of our case resolution teams who will contact you as soon as possible to explain how your complaint will be progressed."