Quickly exit this site by pressing the Escape key Leave this site
We use some essential cookies to make our website work. We’d like to set additional cookies so we can remember your preferences and understand how you use our site.
You can manage your preferences and cookie settings at any time by clicking on “Customise Cookies” below. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Cookies notice.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Sorry, there was a technical problem. Please try again.
This site is a beta, which means it's a work in progress and we'll be adding more to it over the next few weeks. Your feedback helps us make things better, so please let us know what you think.
FOI Reference: 803/2024
Request:
Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, I would like to request the following information regarding how Clare’s Law requests (or the Domestic Violence Disclosure scheme) are handled by Heddlu Dyfed Powys. Specifically, I would like to know:
1) The number of Clare’s Law requests that are accepted each year by Heddlu Dyfed Powys.
2) The number of Clare’s Law requests that are rejected each year by Heddlu Dyfed Powys.
3) The average wait time each year for a Clare’s Law request to be responded to, each year by Heddlu Dyfed Powys.
4) The highest wait time for a Clare’s Law request to be responded, to each year by Heddlu Dyfed Powys.
I would like you to provide the information in pdf form if possible, with a yearly breakdown from 2018-2024.
Clarification sought on 20/08/24:
The terminology that you have used within your request is not applicable to the CSODS process. ‘Accepted’ and ‘Rejected’ are not terms we apply to CSODS applications.
Please refer to the CSODS Home Office guidance and then reword your FOI application so that we are then a position to provide a meaningful response to you
Annex E: Public guidance on the CSODS (publishing.service.gov.uk)
Clarification received on 20/08/24
Just to be clear, I’m not referring to the CSODS process which is known as ‘Sarah’s Law’ as you have suggested, but Clare’s Law, known as the Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme.
Instead using the terminology of ‘accepted’ or ‘rejected’, I’m interested in knowing how many applications under Clare’s Law were applied for and how many resulted in disclosure.
I have re-worded my FOI request in line with this terminology:
1) The number of Clare’s Law requests that are applied for each year by Heddlu Dyfed Powys.
2) The number of Clare’s Law requests result in disclosure each year by Heddlu Dyfed Powys.
3) The average wait time each year for a Clare’s Law request to be responded to, each year by Heddlu Dyfed Powys.
4) The highest wait time for a Clare’s Law request to be responded, to each year by Heddlu Dyfed Powys.
---------------------------------------
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 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 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 136 hours) to comply with your request. The regulations can be located @ www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/3244
The Freedom of Information department has been advised that some of the information in respect of your request is not held in an easily retrievable format.
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 question 1 & 2 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.
Response
DVDS Application and Disclosure |
Right To Know Applications |
RTK Disclosure |
Right To Ask Applications |
RTA Disclosure |
Apr 2019 - Mar 2020 |
123 |
106 (86%) |
62 |
45 (72%) |
Apr 2020 - Mar 2021 |
222 |
199 (89%) |
92 |
39 (42%) |
Apr 2021 - Mar 2022 |
205 |
183 (89%) |
140 |
76 (54%) |
Apr 2022 - Mar 2023 |
243 |
132 (54%) |
174 |
88 (50%) |
Due to a change in Police systems in the way in which occurrences are recorded, the number of records between the period April 2023 to March 2024, would have to be manually interrogated.
It has been established that there are a total of at least 373 records that cover this period of your request. It has also been established that it would take a minimum of 5 minutes to review and obtain the information for a single record in respect of your request.
The process outlined results in the below time estimate.
373 x 5mins = 31hrs
As well as this, average times and waiting times is not data we would have previously held and would also require a manual interrogation of each record at a minimum of 5 mins each, which is estimated to take at least 105hrs of work.
Time estimate to complete task = 136 hours
In accordance therefore 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. Y
ou 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 public authorities right to cite exemptions if relevant.
______________________________________
It should be noted that as a result of the systems adopted by Dyfed-Powys Police in relation to the recording of such information that the information released may or may not be accurate.
Furthermore, it should also be noted that Police forces in the United Kingdom are routinely required to provide crime statistics to government bodies and the recording criteria is set nationally. However, the systems used for recording these figures are not generic, nor are the procedures used locally in capturing the crime data. It should be noted that for these reasons this force's response to your questions should not be used for comparison purposes with any other response you may receive.
(This is a response under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and disclosed on 06/09/2024)