From: D.J. Keenan
Sent: 24 October 2007 14:48
Subject: Queen's University Belfast [Ref. FS50163282]
Dear Mr. Craig,
Further to our previous correspondence, I write now to appeal the decision
of Queen's University Belfast [QUB] to reject my FoI Request. QUB's
decision is unacceptable to me, and I have exhausted the internal appeal
It is notable that the main issues raised in my last appeal to QUB (on
July 13th) were wholly ignored by QUB in its final rejection
letter. Specifically, my appeal noted that "the statutes require that the
university fulfill a request partially, if the request cannot be feasibly
fulfilled in full" and that "my Request could be largely fulfilled by giving me
a copy of the computer files that contain the requested information; making a
copy of the relevant computer files would obviously take [only] hours".
There is no acknowledgement of any of this in QUB's rejection letter.
The above, as well as the repeated delays throughout the processing of my
Request, and the unreasonableness of previous responses to my Request, make it
plain that QUB is acting with wilful intent to avoid conforming
with the FoI Act. (Another evidence for this is the third paragraph
of the last rejection letter, which is severely misleading.)
To summarize, I am requesting a copy of the computer files that QUB has
that contain some of the information specified in my initial Request. I
understand that not all the information requested is computerized; I
additionally understand that the files might contain ancillary information not
requested; I further understand that the information might not be in exactly the
format that I requested. But I still want the copies of the files.
A timeline of events is appended. A copy of relevant correspondence
with QUB is attached.
Douglas J. Keenan
Phone: 020 7537 4122
On April 10th, I submitted a Request for Information to the
Information Compliance Unit at QUB.
On April 24th, having received no acknowledgement of my request, I
telephoned QUB. The university claimed to have sent me a letter of
acknowledgement by post; the letter was supposedly sent on April 16th, but
had not (and has not) arrived. I pointed out that my Request had been sent
by e-mail, and asked that a all communications be done electronically. A
copy of the letter was then forwarded to me by e-mail.
The letter claimed that my e-mailed Request had only been received on
April 16th. The letter (correctly) stated that QUB had 20 business
days to process my Request, and concluded that an overall response would be
provided by May 15th, i.e. 20 business days after April 16th. No
explanation of why it took six days to receive my e-mail was provided.
On May 11th, I received an e-mail from the Information Compliance
Officer at QUB stating that a response to my Request would be provided on May
18th. The explanation given was that the Officer was on leave.
On May 21st, 28 business days after my Request was submitted
(allowing one business day for receiving the Request), having received no
response from QUB, I e-mailed a complaint to firstname.lastname@example.org
, Cc QUB.
On May 22nd (i.e. the next day), I received a response from QUB.
My request was refused (on grounds that seemed to me to be absurd).
On May 24th, I filed an appeal with QUB.
On May 25th, I received an acknowledgement of the appeal, from QUB.
On June 21st, I received a rejection of my appeal from QUB.
On July 13th, I filed a second appeal with QUB.
On July 24th, I received an acknowledgement of my second appeal, from
On September 28th, 54 business days after filing my second appeal, I
received a rejection of the appeal.