Foi 247 Panto to Farce

Dear “Hancock, Nigel” <Nigel.Hancock@rotherham.gov.uk>

Thank you for your response.

Please inform me why the illegal signs were not required to be removed ASAP until the planning application had been received and then approved?

As far as I’m aware no such provision or offer was made to the Dalton and Whiston citizens. They were told that no planning permission had been requested, granted or approved and they should remove the offending items ASAP, and failure to do so would result in legal action against them from RMBC.

It seems to me that RMBC is treating its “friends” with a much different approach to the interpretation and enforcement of the law than it is the citizens who reside here, pay local and national taxes here, and thus bankroll you and your organisation.

Please respond to my further questions without delay.

Yours Sincerely,
Donald H. Buxton

— On Mon, 24/9/12, Hancock, Nigel <Nigel.Hancock@rotherham.gov.uk> wrote:
From: Hancock, Nigel <Nigel.Hancock@rotherham.gov.uk>
Subject: RE: N.B. UPDATE – Fw: URGENT – TAKE NOTE – Fw: Re: FW: FOI Request – 247
To: DON BUXTON, “ChiefExecutive” <ChiefExecutive@rotherham.gov.uk>, “Akhtar, Jahangir” <Jahangir.Akhtar@rotherham.gov.uk>
Cc: “Mower, Karen” <Karen.Mower@rotherham.gov.uk>, “FreedomofInformation” <Freedomofinformation@rotherham.gov.uk>, “Herring, Luke” <Luke.Herring@rotherham.gov.uk>
Date: Monday, 24 September, 2012, 7:33

Dear Mr Buxton,

I can confirm that an application for advertisement consent has been submitted (RB2012/1399) and is currently being checked to ensure that all the information that we require is there.

I will ensure that you are notified once the application has been validated.

Kind regards

Nigel Hancock
Development Manager – North
Development Management
Planning and Regeneration
Environment & Development Services
Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council

From: DON BUXTON
Sent: 23 September 2012 16:20
To: Hancock, Nigel; ChiefExecutive; Akhtar, Jahangir

Subject: N.B. UPDATE – Fw: URGENT – TAKE NOTE – Fw: Re: FW: FOI Request – 247

Dear “NigelHancock” <Nigel.Hancock@rotherham.gov.uk>

cc – chiefexecutive@rotherham.gov.uk  Jahangir.Akhtar@rotherham.gov.uk

Further to my e-mail to you of 3 September (see attached + Photo0001) in which I updated you to the fact that RMBC’s request to MyPlace management to remove the illegal advertising from the side of their MyPlace Rotherham had thus far been ignored, I am now attaching a further x3 photos of the same building/location taken today on ?23 ?September ?2012, ??15:05:58 which clearly show the illegal signage to be still attached to the building in clear contravention of RMBC planning regulations.

I am now seriously concerned that RMBC may bring our country’s laws into disrepute by an apparent lack of willingness to enforce our democratic laws with the same vigour as that which was eagerly and harshly enforced against the two citizens of Dalton and Whiston when they infringed planning regulations.

It surely cannot be right in a supposed democracy that two citizens in Whiston and Dalton have the full weight of the law directed at them to ensure compliance with the law, and yet the MyPlace Rotherham seems to be enjoying a softly-softly old-boy-network approach from those tasked with the enforcement of our planning laws.

Please inform me as a matter of urgency what your department has done about this matter thus far, and what further steps you intend to take to categorically ensure the removal of the signage until such time as the appropriate planning application has been received and approved by RMBC.

Yours Sincerely,
Donald H. Buxton

Freedom of Information Request 247 Another Pantomime, Now Farce?

Dear “NigelHancock” Nigel.Hancock@rotherham.gov.uk

Further to my e-mail response to you on Tuesday, 21 August, 2012, 15:35 I have further information to report to you on the same matter which leads me to believe that the Manager of MySpace Rotherham has completely disregarded whatever communication you may have had with them.

Please see the attached picture taken on today’s date, 3 September 2012 at 15:03 hrs which clearly shows that there are four signs still in-situ on the MySpace building, and all clearly visible to the public from the footpath and also the busy road junction at St Ann’s Roundabout. I am of the opinion that such signage so near to a busy traffic roundabout may be likely to distract drivers and thus pose a risk to pedestrians crossing the road at that point.

I now wish you to clearly inform me what your next steps will be in this matter to ensure that absolute compliance with the law is observed by MySpace, or failing that what legal course of action you intend to pursue against the MySpace organisation and those tasked with the responsibility of running it.

Surely you must agree with me that for a society and a community to remain cohesive it is incumbent on everyone, i.e. citizens, statutory organisations and businesses, to comply with the exact letter of the law however much of a burden that may prove to be or however much ones own personal points of view are at variance with the law.

Perhaps you will pursue your actions against MySpace with the same relentless vigour and determination as that which RMBC chose to employ when they took enforceable action against veteran citizen, Arthur Newey Esq of Dalton, or Mr C.Hamby of Whiston, when RMBC eagerly took those individuals through the Courts to secure full compliance with the law.

Or failing any of the above, perhaps you can clarify just exactly which civil and criminal laws I am at liberty to ignore without incurring any legal penalties or enforcement action from RMBC.

I require you to provide me with a detailed response in relation to the above concerns which I have again raised with you.

Perhaps you would be so kind as to supply me with an electronic redacted copy, minus any personal details, of the communication you sent to the Manager at MySpace?

Yours Sincerely,
Donald H. Buxton

Previously:

Freedom of Information Request 247 Another Pantomime?

The final instalment in the saga that is FOI 247: Dear “Hancock, Nigel” Nigel.Hancock@rotherham.gov.uk Thank you for your courteous and informative response. I trust, and indeed hope, that the RMBC Planning Department will pursue an equally vigorous line with the … Continue reading →

For everything on FOI 247, please click here.

Freedom of Information Request 247 Another Pantomime?

The final instalment in the saga that is FOI 247:

Dear “Hancock, Nigel” Nigel.Hancock@rotherham.gov.uk

Thank you for your courteous and informative response.

I trust, and indeed hope, that the RMBC Planning Department will pursue an equally vigorous line with the Manager of MyPlace as they did with elderly pensioner Arthur Newey Esq of Dalton, in order to ensure an equitable application of the planning laws which exist in order to prevent a plethora of inappropriate signages besmirching our communities.

http://rotherhamadvertiser.co.uk/news/90591/jack-and-the-beanstalk-poster-is-against-the-rules-oh-yes-it-is-.aspx

I shall be grateful if you will make a note to keep me informed of the results of your Department’s communications with MySpace and whether they intend to accept your diligent application of our town’s planning laws.

Yours Sincerely,
Donald H. Buxton

On Tue, 21/8/12, Hancock, Nigel <Nigel.Hancock@rotherham.gov.uk> wrote:
From: Hancock, Nigel <Nigel.Hancock@rotherham.gov.uk>
Subject: FW: FOI Request – 247
To: Don Buxton
Cc: “FreedomofInformation” <Freedomofinformation@rotherham.gov.uk>
Date: Tuesday, 21 August, 2012, 12:33

Dear Mr Buxton,

Further to your freedom of information request, I can confirm that advertisement consent for the banners has not currently been applied for which is why there is no Decision Notice or Officer Report.  However, I can confirm that the Planning Department has been in contact with the Manager of MyPlace and advised then that advertisement consent is required and have requested that an application be submitted if they are to be continued to be displayed.

Kind regards

Nigel Hancock

Development Manager – North
Development Management
Planning and Regeneration
Environment & Development Services
Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council

FOI 247 Previously on Rotherham Politics:

Freedom of Information Request 247 Another Pantomime?

The final instalment in the saga that is FOI 247: Dear “Hancock, Nigel” Nigel.Hancock@rotherham.gov.uk Thank you for your courteous and informative response. I trust, and indeed hope, that the RMBC Planning Department will pursue an equally vigorous line with the … Continue reading →

Freedom of Information Request 247 Another Response

Posted on August 9, 2012 by

Dear “FreedomofInformation” Freedomofinformation@rotherham.gov.uk Thank you for your courteous e-mail. I eagerly await your colleagues’ response with interest and undiluted enthusiasm and simply can’t wait to read what they send me. Yours Sincerely, Donald H. Buxton On Wed, 8/8/12, FreedomofInformation <Freedomofinformation@rotherham.gov.uk> … Continue reading →

Freedom of Information Request 247

Posted on August 8, 2012 by

Dear Mr Kimber, Please will you inform me whether your organisation intends to press for Planning Approval Notice for all of the signage attached to the “MyPlace – Rotherham ” building, some of which is identified in the attached photo … Continue reading →

Freedom of Information Request 247 Another Response

Dear “FreedomofInformation” Freedomofinformation@rotherham.gov.uk

Thank you for your courteous e-mail.

I eagerly await your colleagues’ response with interest and undiluted enthusiasm and simply can’t wait to read what they send me.

Yours Sincerely,
Donald H. Buxton

On Wed, 8/8/12, FreedomofInformation <Freedomofinformation@rotherham.gov.uk> wrote:
From: FreedomofInformation <Freedomofinformation@rotherham.gov.uk>
Subject: RE: FOI Request – 247
To: DON BUXTON
Date: Wednesday, 8 August, 2012, 14:37

Dear Mr. Buxton

I acknowledge your query relating to your recent FOI request (247). I have sent this onto the department who provided us with the information to respond to your original request and asked them to look into this for you.

Yours sincerely,

Kyle Hopkins
Access to Information Assistant
Information Governance Unit
Legal Services
Resources Directorate
Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council

Freedom of Information Request 247

Dear Mr Kimber,

Please will you inform me whether your organisation intends to press for Planning Approval Notice for all of the signage attached to the “MyPlace – Rotherham ” building, some of which is identified in the attached photo taken at 16:59 hrs today, Monday 9 July 2012.

Also will you inform me whether your organisation intends to press for an Officer Approval Report for the signage attached to the “MyPlace – Rotherham” building identified in the attached photo taken at 16:59 hrs today, Monday 9 July 2012.
If your organisation does not intend to press for Planning Consent and an Officer Approval Report please inform me in detail why this is the case.

Yours Sincerely,
Donald H. Buxton

On Wed, 8/8/12, FreedomofInformation <Freedomofinformation@rotherham.gov.uk> wrote:
From: FreedomofInformation <Freedomofinformation@rotherham.gov.uk>
Subject: FOI Request – 247
To: DON BUXTON

Dear Mr. Buxton

Freedom of Information Act 2000 – Request for Information – 247

Thank you for your request for information received on the 9th July 2012.

1. Please provide me with a copy of the Planning Approval Notice for all of the signage attached to the “MyPlace – Rotherham ” building, some of which is identified in the attached photo taken at 16:59 hrs today, Monday 9 July 2012.

No application for advertisement consent has been submitted therefore no information is held in this respect.

2. Please provide me with a copy of the Officer Approval Report and/or the Agenda and Minutes of the RMBC Planning Board Meeting at which Planning Consent was granted for the erection of the signage attached to the “MyPlace – Rotherham” building identified in the attached photo taken at 16:59 hrs today, Monday 9 July 2012.

Not applicable, please see above.

In accordance with the procedures of Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council (RMBC), I am advising you that the cost to the authority in responding to this request has been £18.95 which reflects the staff time and administration costs involved. RMBC however does not currently make any charge to customers for processing Freedom of Information Act requests.

If you are not satisfied with this response you have the right to an internal review by the Council.  Please contact us via the above email address or by post to Sarah Corbett, Information Governance Manager, Legal Services, Riverside House, Main Street , Rotherham , S60 1AE .

If you are not satisfied with the internal review, you can appeal to the Information Commissioner.  Contact details are: Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane , Wilmslow, Cheshire . SK9 5AF. Telephone 01625 545700. Alternatively go to http://www.ico.gov.uk/

Yours sincerely,

Kyle Hopkins

Access to Information Assistant
Information Governance Unit
Legal Services
Resources Directorate
Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council