Gallwch adael y wefan hon yn gyflym drwy wasgu’r fysell Escape Allanfa Gyflym
Rydym yn defnyddio rhai cwcis hanfodol i wneud i’n gwefan weithio. Hoffem osod cwcis ychwanegol fel y gallwn gofio eich dewisiadau a deall sut rydych yn defnyddio ein gwefan.
Gallwch reoli eich dewisiadau a gosodiadau cwcis unrhyw bryd drwy glicio ar “Addasu cwcis” isod. I gael rhagor o wybodaeth am sut rydym yn defnyddio cwcis, gweler ein Hysbysiad cwcis.
Mae eich dewisiadau cwcis wedi’u cadw. Gallwch ddiweddaru eich gosodiadau cwcis unrhyw bryd ar y dudalen cwcis.
Mae eich dewisiadau cwcis wedi’u cadw. Gallwch ddiweddaru eich gosodiadau cwcis unrhyw bryd ar y dudalen cwcis.
Mae’n ddrwg gennym, roedd problem dechnegol. Rhowch gynnig arall arni.
Diolch am roi cynnig ar fersiwn 'beta' ein gwefan newydd. Mae'n waith ar y gweill, byddwn yn ychwanegu gwasanaethau newydd dros yr wythnosau nesaf, felly cymerwch gip a gadewch i ni wybod beth yw eich barn chi.
FOI Reference: 983/2023
Request:
Response:
Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 places two duties on public authorities. Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at Section 1(1)(a) is to confirm or deny whether the information specified in a request is held. The second duty at Section 1(1)(b) is to disclose information that has been confirmed as being held.
I can confirm that the cost of determining whether any information relative to questions 1 – 5 of this request is or isn’t held is above the amount to which we are legally required to respond therefore we are withholding the whole of the requested information since we consider that the Section 12 (2) exemption the Cost of Compliance exceeds the Appropriate Limit applies to it.
Where exemptions are relied upon Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires Dyfed Powys Police, when refusing to provide such information (because the information is exempt) to provide you the applicant with a notice which: (a) states that fact, (b) specifies the exemption in question and (c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies. The following exemption has been applied to the whole of the information you have requested:
Section 12(2) – The cost of compliance exceeds the Appropriate Limit
Section 12(2) states: “…Subsection (1) does not exempt the public authority from its obligation to comply with paragraph (a) of section 1(1) unless the estimated cost of complying with that paragraph alone would exceed the appropriate limit.”
The cost of determining what information is held, if any, relevant to question 1 – 5 of your request is above the amount to which we are legally required to respond i.e. the cost of locating and retrieving the information exceeds the “appropriate level” as stated in the Freedom of Information (Fees and Appropriate Limit) Regulations 2004. It is estimated that it would exceed 18 hours (i.e. minimum of 29.17 hours) to comply with your request. The regulations can be located @
www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/si/si2004/20043244.htm
The Freedom of Information Department has been advised that the information in respect of questions 1 – 5 of your request is not held in an easily retrievable format. Therefore, in order to establish what information, if any, is held in relation to questions 1 – 5 of the request would require the individual interrogation of all dog attack records over the time frame specified to ascertain a response (if held) to questions 1 – 5. It has been established that for the period as specified within the request (i.e. April – September 2023) there are a total 175 dog attack records that would require researching. It has been estimated that it would take a minimum of 10 minutes to research a single dog attack record for relevance to your request as outlined above, resulting in the following broken down time estimate.
Apr – Sept 23 = dog attack records at 10 minutes per record = 29.17 hours
Total of 29.17 hours to complete task
Please note: Please see the end of the document for a response in relation to question 6 of your request which has been provided as a gesture of goodwill and outside of the FOI Act.
In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000, this letter acts as a Refusal Notice for the WHOLE of this request under Section 17(5) A public authority which, in relation to any request for information, is relying on a claim that section 12 or section 14 applies must, within the time for complying with section 1(1), give the applicant a notice stating that fact. You may wish to refine and resubmit your request so that it reduces the time shown above to fall within the 18 hours. Should you require any further advice in relation to this matter please don’t hesitate to contact the Freedom of Information Unit. Please also be advised that should the request be refined, it does not remove the Force’s right to cite exemptions if relevant.
Although excess cost removes the forces obligations under the Freedom of Information Act to provide any further information, as a gesture of goodwill, I have provided information, relative to questions 6 of your request which has been easily retrievable and outlined below. I trust this is helpful, but it does not affect our legal right to rely on the fees regulations for the remainder of your request.
Question 6:
Month 2023 |
No. of dogs destroyed |
Breed |
April |
0 |
N/A |
May |
1 |
XL Bully |
June |
3 |
Staffie x Bull dog, American Bull dog, Akita x Malamute |
July |
1 |
Chihuahua |
August |
0 |
N/A |
September |
0 |
N/A |
(This is a response under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and disclosed on 15/11/23)