1) provide the minutes and notes of all meetings when the removal of the residents congestion charge discount was considered. 2) provide all expert advice including scientific evidence, technical reports and any other material provided as evidence for the removal of the residents congestion charge discount. 3) provide all legal advice considered as part of the decision to remove the residents congestion charge discount including but not limited to advice around discrimination and human rights considerations. 4) provide internal communications including but not limited to emails where the the residents discount for the congestion charge is discussed or mentioned since 02/02/2020

---

TfL Ref: FOI-2210-2021

Thank you for your request received by Transport for London (TfL) on 2^nd February 2021 asking for information about the residents discount for the Congestion Charge.

Your request has been considered in accordance with the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act and our information access policy.

Specifically you asked:

“Congestion charge - removal of residents discount

1) provide the minutes and notes of all meetings when the removal of the residents congestion charge discount was considered.

2) provide all expert advice including scientific evidence, technical reports and any other material provided as evidence for the removal of the residents congestion charge discount.

3) provide all legal advice considered as part of the decision to remove the residents congestion charge discount including but not limited to advice around discrimination and human rights considerations.

4) provide internal communications including but not limited to emails where the residents discount for the congestion charge is discussed or mentioned since 02/02/2020.”

Before addressing your questions, note that the Mayoral Decision document found via the following link explains the rationale behind the changes to the residents discount:

https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/md2648_temporary_changes_to_the_congestion_charge_-_signed.pdf

The appendices to the Decision document provide additional information that will be of note. They can be found here

https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/appendices_1-4_1.pdf

These documents explain the process followed and the considerations given in making the decision. The changes will be kept under review by TfL to ensure their continued effectiveness in light of the changing response to the pandemic.

Turning to your questions, I can confirm that we hold the information you require. However, your requests are being refused under section 14(1) of the Freedom of Information Act. This exemption applies where the impact on a public authority of responding to a request cannot be justified. In this case, the exemption applies given the amount of information that falls within the scope of your request and the amount of resource that would be required to source it all and to consider its appropriateness for release. For example, your fourth question asks for all internal communications where the residents discount is mentioned over the last year. We have run an automated search of all internal emails containing the phrase “residents discount” for the period in question, and this returns thousands of hits. Before releasing under FOI this material would have to be reviewed to see whether it contains any exempt material, and any such material would then need to be redacted (this would, for example, include personal details such as direct phone numbers and email addresses). This would require an inordinate amount of work on our part (estimated to be many tens of hours, if not more), and we do not consider that to be a proportionate use of our resource.

In reaching the conclusion to apply section 14(1) we have taken into account guidance provide by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) which is published online here:

https://ico.org.uk/your-data-matters/official-information/

And;

https://ico.org.uk/media/1198/dealing-with-vexatious-requests.pdf

The first link provides general advice and guidance to the public on how best to access information from public bodies, including a table of “Dos and Don’ts”. That table includes the following advice:

Don’t…“Send ‘catch-all’ requests for information (such as ‘please provide me with everything you hold about ‘x’) when you aren’t sure what specific documents to ask for.”

Don’t…“Disrupt a public authority by the sheer weight of requests or the volume of information requested.”

And;

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.”.

The second link above provides specific guidance on the application of section 14(1). This includes the following:

“Whilst public authorities should think carefully before refusing a request….they should not regard section 14(1) as something which is only to be applied in the most extreme of circumstances.”

“….the key question to ask is whether the request is likely to cause a disproportionate or unjustified level of disruption, irritation or distress….This will usually be a matter of objectively judging the evidence of the impact on the authority and weighing this against any evidence about the purpose and value of the request.”

And;

“The Information Commissioner recognises that dealing with unreasonable requests can place a strain on resources and get in the way of delivering mainstream services or answering legitimate requests…

Section 14(1) is designed to protect public authorities by allowing them to refuse any requests which have the potential to cause a disproportionate or unjustified level of disruption, irritation or distress.”

On the subject of “fishing”, the guidance states:

“Public authorities sometimes express concern about the apparent tendency of some requesters…. to use their FOIA rights where they have no idea what information, if any, will be caught by the request…..These requests are often called ‘fishing expeditions’ because the requester casts their net widely in the hope that this will catch information that is noteworthy or otherwise useful to them….. Whilst fishing for information is not, in itself, enough to make a request vexatious, some requests may:

Create a burden by requiring the authority to spend a considerable amount of time considering any exemptions and redactions…”.

Given that there are thousands of items that fall within the scope of your request, it is this burden that is central to our decision to apply the exemption. While we appreciate that there is a legitimate public interest in understanding why the changes to the residents discount were made, the reasons have already been explained and proactively published in the Mayoral Decision notice cited above (in particular see paragraphs 2.27. to 2.33, although the wider document and appendices are also of relevance). We do not believe, therefore, that the burden of reviewing thousands of items is proportionate to any value that may be found in the material, especially as it is likely to include large amounts of material that is duplicated (in the case of email chains where one email responds to another and so forth) or is of no particular consequence. For these reasons the section 14(1) exemption applies.

If you are considering submitting a further FOI request please think carefully about whether the request is essential at this current time, as answering FOI requests will require the use of limited resources and the attention of staff who could be supporting other essential activity. Where requests are made, please note that our response time may be impacted by the current situation.

Please see the attached information sheet for details of your right to appeal as well as information on copyright and what to do if you would like to re-use any of the information we have disclosed.

Yours sincerely,

David Wells

FOI Case Officer

FOI Case Management Team

General Counsel

Transport for London

Back to top

---