Request ID: FOI-0253-2223 Date published: 26 May 2022
You asked
Follow-up to FOI-0043-2223:
Thanks for coming back to me.
If I may ask some follow up questions.
3. If CCS were placed under and restrictions further to the death of an employee at Waterloo station in 2019?
Answer: After the tragic incident at Waterloo there were no restrictions placed on CCS by London Underground / TfL. Note that the cleaning of the travellators at Waterloo London Underground station is contracted to a company called KONE. KONE subcontracted the cleaning element of the travellators to CCS. TfL do not have any direct contract with CCS for this work.
a. Can you confirm if an investigation took place further to the incident and if this has now been completed ?
b. The outcome of the investigation ?
c. Can you confirm if any other contractors have had restrictions placed on them since the 1st January 2018 for to any incidents and/or accident? And provide details of these incident/accident ?
d. Can you confirm if any temporary restrictions were placed on CCS or Kone further to the incident;
e. Can you confirm who Site Person in Charge was employed by (i.e. was this Kone or CCS for example);
f. Can you confirm why Kone sub-contracted these works?
In addition are you able to confirm if an enforcement notice was issued further to the accident via the ORR ? and if so who this was issued too?
5. Confirmation on how the framework for protection services ( labour supply) is manged and audited for compliance?
Answer: Package 01002 Provision of Safety Critical Resources is let under TfL 00249 Lot 1 Contingent Labour Frameworks. Call off contracts were issued to the successful companies.
These call off contracts are managed by the LU Access team. Compliance of protection individuals supplied to this contract is monitored via a team of Access Compliance Inspectors. RISQS have also carried out audits of the companies, which are, as explained on their website: “..intended to facilitate the validation of information submitted by Organisation’s on to the RISQS platform at the prequalification stage and to assess additional areas of compliance as required by Infrastructure Managers and the RISQS Committee. Audits take place upon initial entry to the scheme, on a periodic basis and where there are relevant changes to the Organisation’s information within RISQS.”
1. Can you please provide a template audit that is used by the access compliance inspectors?
2. Can you confirm how many Access compliance Inspectors are engaged directly by LUL?
3. Can you provide the dates that inspectors took place between the following periods ( broken down between CCS and Morson );
a. 01/01/2018 – 31/12/2018
b. 01/01/2019 – 31/12/2019
c. 01/01/2020 – 31/12/2020
d. 01/01/2021 - 31/12/2021
e. 01/01/2022 - 06/05/2022
4. Can you confirm how many contract management/review meetings have took place for CCS and Morson between the period below ;
a. 01/01/2018 – 31/12/2018
b. 01/01/2019 – 31/12/2019
c. 01/01/2020 – 31/12/2020
d. 01/01/2021 - 31/12/2021
e. 01/01/2022 - 06/05/2022
5. Can you confirm the scoring/KPI further in relation to the contract management/review meetings that took place for CCS and Morson for the dates provided below;
a. 01/01/2018 – 31/12/2018
b. 01/01/2019 – 31/12/2019
c. 01/01/2020 – 31/12/2020
d. 01/01/2021 - 31/12/2021
e. 01/01/2022 - 06/05/2022
Thank you for your requests of 28th April 2022 and 6th May 2022 following up your earlier request under reference FOI-0043-2223. Your new requests are detailed at the bottom of the page.
Your requests have been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act and our information access policy.
I can confirm that we hold some of the information you require. However, it is not possible to source the information to answer all of your questions within the appropriate limit for responding to requests as set out under section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act. Under section 12 TfL is not obliged to provide information if it would cost more than £450 to determine if the requested information is held, and to then locate, retrieve or extract it from elsewhere. This is calculated at a rate of £25 per hour, equivalent to 18 hours work. Where the same applicant has made a request for the same or similar information within any 60 consecutive day period then those requests can be aggregated for the purposes of calculating costs. This applies to the three new requests below along with your previous, already answered request.
As an example of the time it would take to respond, to address the single question under reference FOI-0256-2223 we would need to manually review over 600 records to source the information as there is no automated way of extracting the detail requested. Even at a conservative estimate of 2 minutes per record, this would take over 1,200 minutes, which is in itself above the 18 hour threshold (which equates to 1,080 minutes). Clearly, taking into account the time already spent answering case ref FOI-0043-2223 and the time that would have to be spent answering your other new requests, the aggregated costs limit would be far exceeded.
In order to bring your requests within the costs limit you may wish to reframe them to narrow their scope. Note that any request asking us to review several years’ worth of data is likely to be excessively time consuming. Note also that some of your questions may be better addressed elsewhere - for example, for information about the activities of the ORR you can send an FOI request directly to that body, via its website here:
Finally, in considering any revised request I would suggest that you read the advice and guidance provided by the Information Commissioner on how best to access information from public bodies, published on its website here:
As you can see, the table of “Dos and Don’ts” found halfway down that page includes the following advice:
Don’t... “Disrupt a public authority by the sheer weight of requests or the volume of information requested.”
Don’t... “Deliberately ‘fish’ for information by submitting a very broad or random requests in the hope it will catch something noteworthy or otherwise useful.”
Do... “Think about whether making a request is the best way of achieving what you want.”;
And;
Do... “Give the authority ample opportunity to address any previous requests you have made before submitting new ones.”
Please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to appeal.
Yours sincerely,
David Wells FOI Case Officer FOI Case Management Team General Counsel Transport for London
