Water Charges - FOI to Scottish Water, Appeal to the Scottish Information Commissioner

FOI officer.
Scottish Water.
55 Buckstone Terrace,
Edinburgh,
EH10 6XH.

Freedom of Information request.

Sirs,

Please refer to your response by email from Lidia Niemczuk-Greer, dated 21 September 2020, sent at 11.37

The request made was as follows:

The recorded information held by Scosh Water and or any of its subsidiaries as to the law and or authority and or grounds under which invoices for charges have been raised and are being pursued.

The response received included the following statement:

Property and Roads Drainage charges were not removed and remain in place for your premises because all available informaon suggests that surface water from the premises drains into the public sewer.

The response is inadequate as it fails to answer the ques,on raised.

The information you supplied at the request of Scottish Information Commissioner under the previous FOI demonstrated that there is neither a water supply nor a drainage / sewerage connection to the premises. The premises excludes the roof or any part thereof and excludes the car park or any part thereof both of which belong to, and are sole responsibility of the Landlord.

Noted that the response appears to be a rhetorical question as to whether the premises are "Eligible Premises" as defined in Sec,on 27 of the 2005 Act.

Noted that it Scottish Water's Revenue Protection Department, who aAempt to determine the status of a premises under the Sec,on 27 of the 2005 Act.

If the response implies that the Scottish Water make the determination without due regard to the Laws of Scotland, then it becomes impossible for businesses to operate in a fair and reasonable environment.

It is therefore in the Public Interest for a business to be able to read and understand the Law regarding their liability for charges, and for Scottish Water to abide by the same Laws.

Your response is found to be inadequate, and you are required to review your response.

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your request for information.

As the information you have requested is ‘environmental information’ for the purposes of the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRs), we are required to deal with your request under those regulations.

We have therefore applied the exemption contained in section 39(2) of FOISA and we have dealt with your request for environmental information under the EIRs alone.

Your request for information was for the following:

The recorded informa on held by the Scosh Water and or any of its subsidiaries as to the law and or authority and or grounds under which invoices for charges have been raised and are being pursued.

In repose to your request, in relation to the continued application of property and roads drainage charges for your property at [Address] (Supply Point ID 999999999). As indicated in our previous response in October 2019 (attached), a survey of all of the units at [address] in 2016 established that only [part] had a water supply so the unmeasured water and unmeasured foul sewerage charges were removed from 11B at that )me with backdated effect. This followed a number of deregistra)on requests which you raised via your Licensed Provider, Business Stream, challenging the application of water charges at your premises.

Property and Roads Drainage charges were not removed and remain in place for [part] because all available informa)on suggests that surface water from the premises drains into the public sewer. No request has been raised via your Licensed Provider to remove the drainage charges. If you believe that surface water from [part] does not drain into the public sewer you can request a deregistra)on via your Licensed Provider and we will be happy to investigate this further. If this is the case, it would be helpful if you could provide any available information to your Licence Provider which has led you to this conclusion to assist our investigation.

If you have any queries regarding your FOI request please feel free to contact me and I will be happy to assist. You can do this by contacting the following email address This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

You can seek a review of this response within forty working days and thereafter appeal to the Scottish Information Commissioner.

Further information on the appeals procedure can be obtained from the attached document and the Commissioner's website at www.itspublicknowledge.info/Appeal.

Yours sincerely,

Lidia Niemczuk-Greer
FOI Officer 

FOI Team.
Scottish water.
55 Buckstone Terrace,
Edinburgh.
EH10 6XH.
27th August, 2020

Dear sir/ Madam.

Freedom of information Request.

I apply to be supplied with the information specified below under the terms of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002.

The information requested is in respect of the premises [address], and is specified as follows:

The recorded information held by the Sco sh Water and or any of its subsidiaries as to the law and or authority and or grounds under which invoices for charges have been raised and are being pursued.

It is to be noted that a previous FOI Request (Scottish Water reference ?????) elucidated the following information provided in response to the Scottish Information Commissioner's request to Scottish Water to provide additional information, which they did in October 2019. This information
confirmed:

• That the definition of an "Eligible Premises" is given at section 27 of the Water Services (Scotland) Act 2005,
• That there is no water supply to the referenced premises,
• That there is no sewerage or drainage connec'on to the referenced premises. 

It is thus determined from the information provided by Scottish Water that the referenced premises are NOT an eligible Premises in terms of the 2005 Act, and thus no charges or due or payable.

The Scottish information commissioner's decision was published as Decision Notice 9999/2020.

Recently, a notice regarding payment has been received, which fails to state the law and or authority and or grounds for raising the charges which it is intimated are due and payable.

Noted that Sco sh water's Revenue Protection Department is responsible for assessing charges, and providing the information necessary to support the charges to be raised to the organisation who actually raise and pursue charges, in this case Sco sh Water Business Steam, a subsidiary of Scottish Water.

Noted also that such information must have been provided to the agent pursuing the alleged debt to enable them to do so, to the extent of presenting their case to a court of law.

Noted further, that this information had, in the eyes of the tenant of the premises, been requested in the previous FOI at item c), but as is his prerogative, the Scottish information commissioner chose to see this
as a request for him to determine whether the premises were an Eligible premise or not. The tenant and advisers are all agreed that the premises are not Eligible premises in terms of Section 27 of 2005 Act.This, combined with the commissioner's recent decision, and due to Scottish Water's ( or subsidiary) continued pursuit of the alleged debt, has meant that a second Freedom of information Request has had to be raised

Thank you for your email of 18 March. Are you asking for any part of that communication to be treated as a request for information under FOISA or the EIRs, or are you simply looking for comment?

As my colleague, Margaret Keyse, explained, I do not have access to the case records at present. Insofar as I can comment on the points you raise:

1. As the decision makes clear, the legislation only covers recorded information actually held by a Scottish public authority at the time the request is received. I note your revised wording, but I cannot guarantee that it will capture recorded information held by Scottish Water.

Never a truer word said. When dealing with Scottish Water who are experts in evasion nothing is simple or straight forward.

However, the law requires any person, body, or company etc etc who makes a demand for payment to have a valid authority to make the demand. All that is being requested is for the valid authority to be provided.

2. Assuming the phone record you refer to was included with submissions made to the investigating officer for the purposes of this case, I confirm (to the best of my knowledge) that it would have considered.

The phone record was NOT included in the submission, as it occurred more than four months after the submission as the subject matter was in response to the additional information supplied by Scottish Water at the instigation of the Commissioner some three months after the appeal was lodged.

It appears therefore that it would NOT have been considered.

I hope this answers your queries adequately, but please let me know if there is anything else I can attempt to clarify.

Just a quick note to thank you for the work you have put in on the decision. Frankly it is great.

In Clause 13 it says that " the Commissioner considered all of the relevant submissions ". Can I ask if this includes the record of the conversation of 17th October 2019 with SW's FOI Officer?  You can see it here:

http://unaccountablescotland.org.uk/index.php/water-charges/water-charges-foi-s-etc/water-charges-foi-to-scottish-water-appeal-to-the-scottish-information-commissioner#17th-october-2019-confirmation-of-phone-call-to-scottish-water

We did forward you the SW's FOI Officer's email confirming that she had passed this to SW's Legal Department on 21st October 2019, to which a reply has not been received.

It seems that the request for the "Applicable Law" could be interpreted as requesting a view on whether Uniforms4You's premises were eligible premises which is how the Commissioner took this. This was not the intent of course.

The question is whether this understanding was contrived in conjunction with Scottish Water ?

We have therefore reworded our standardised FOI [also on the website] to include the words as follows:

The authority under which invoices for drainage charges are raised; that is the Law, Regulation, Statute, or other Statutory Instrument or Provision under which you have raised a charge.

We will approach SW again with the simple request as above, which I would hope, common sense prevailing, they will answer.

However, in the event that they do not, then would the above satisfy the Commissioner. It would be annotated:

Noted that the validity of such is not a matter upon which advice or decision is requested of the SIC.

We have a panel of competent guys including a couple of lawyers, and a couple of Chartered Engineers [Research Project included] who can make that determination very easily.

I look forward to your response.

And thanks again for the decision which we consider to be fair and reasonable.

The copy to Scottish Water was sent to their FOI officer whose email address has an "auto responder". None was received. It was sent again from a different email address and an acknowledgement received. A reply is NOT expected - common sense is unlikely to prevail.

In summary, the decision is fair and reasonable, apart from the request for "Applicable Law" being taken as requesting the Commissioner to determine if the premises were "Eligible Premises" under Section 27 of the 2005 Act. This was not the intention, and the standardised FOI has been amended accordingly.

Decision Notice 048/2020 Water supply and drainage, routes and locations
The Applicant and Public authority: Scottish Water, Case Ref: 201900923

Downloaded 20th March 2020 in pdf format.

Summary

Scottish Water was asked for water supply and drainage routes and locations for specified premises. Scottish Water disclosed some information for adjacent premises, which was out of scope. Following investigation, the Commissioner was satisfied that Scottish Water had carried out adequate searches, but decided that its advice in its correspondence with the Applicant was misleading.

Relevant statutory provisions

The Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (the EIRs) regulations 2(1) (paragraphs (a) and (c) of definition of "environmental information") (Interpretation); 5(1) and (2)(b) (Duty to make available environmental information on request); 10(1), (2) and (4)(a) (Exceptions from duty to make environmental information available); 14(1) Transfer of a request The full text of each of the statutory provisions cited above is reproduced in Appendix 1 to this decision. The Appendix forms part of this decision.

Background

1. It may be helpful to explain that this case concerns an ongoing complaint between Scottish Water and the Applicant about water and sewerage charges for the Applicant’s premises. It centres on Scottish Water’s approach to “eligible premises” under section 27 of the Water Services etc. (Scotland) Act 2005 (the 2005 Act) and whether charges were levied in error.

2. On 28 March 2019, the Applicant made a request for information to Scottish Water (received on 1 April 2019). The Applicant stipulated it wanted information held by Scottish Water or any or its subsidiaries [the Commissioner’s emphasis] regarding premises at a stated address in Glasgow. The request was for:

Part 1 Routes and locations of Scottish Water’s water mains, stop valves and water meters which form the supply to the solum of the premises, including references and physical location of the SPID [Supply Point Identifier Number].

Part 2 Routes and locations of Scottish Water’s main drains, whether it be for storm water, foul water, or combined water into which the solum of the premises drains, including references and physical location of the SPID.

Part 3 The Applicable law; that is the law (as opposed to any rules) under which Scottish Water raised a (“probably erroneous”) charge.

3. On 4 April 2019, Scottish Water asked the Applicant for more detailed information, specifically on the charges received, and from whom they originated, stating it was unable to continue with the request without this clarification.

4. The Applicant replied to Scottish Water on 10 April 2019, stating that the request adequately described the information which had been requested. Decision Notice 048/2020 Page 2

5. Scottish Water issued its response on 19 April 2019 under the EIRs. It disclosed information for parts 1 and 2 but, for part 3, stated it did not hold any recorded information, citing regulation 10(4)(a) of the EIRs.

6. On 24 April 2019, the Applicant wrote to Scottish Water, requesting a review of its decision. The Applicant believed the response was incomplete for the first two parts of the request and gave its reasoning. For the final part, the Applicant explained why it believed regulation 10(4)(a) did not apply, given that Scottish Water’s Revenue Protection Department would determine the charges and must have some lawful authority for doing so.

7. Scottish Water notified the Applicant of the outcome of its review on 23 May 2019, explaining it did not hold any further information falling within the scope of the request (including an explanation of why it did not hold information for part 3).

8. On 4 June 2019 the Applicant wrote to the Commissioner. The Applicant applied to the Commissioner for a decision in terms of section 47(1) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA). By virtue of regulation 17 of the EIRs, Part 4 of FOISA applies to the enforcement of the EIRs as it applies to the enforcement of FOISA, subject to specified modifications. The Applicant stated it was dissatisfied with the outcome of Scottish Water’s review. It believed the information provided was incomplete and gave reasons why, in its view, the review outcome did not fully address the terms of the request. 

Investigation

9. The application was accepted as valid. The Commissioner confirmed that the Applicant made a request for information to a Scottish public authority and asked the authority to review its response to that request before applying to him for a decision.

10. On 17 July 2019, Scottish Water was notified in writing that the Applicant had made a valid application and the case was allocated to an investigating officer.

11. Section 49(3)(a) of FOISA requires the Commissioner to give public authorities an opportunity to provide comments on an application. Scottish Water was invited to comment on this application and to answer specific questions. These related to the extent of searches, including whether information held by subsidiaries of Scottish Water had been included, given the terms of the request.

12. In respect of part 1 of his request, the Applicant stated (in the application) that “It is agreed that no information exists as there is no Water Supply”. In light of this statement from the Applicant, the Commissioner need not consider this element of the request further in this Decision Notice. He will now consider parts 2 and 3 of the request below. 

Commissioner’s analysis and findings

13. In coming to a decision on this matter, the Commissioner considered all of the relevant submissions, or parts of submissions, made to him by both the Applicant and the Scottish public authority. He is satisfied that no matter of relevance has been overlooked. Handling in terms of the EIRs.

On the 18th March 2020 [see above] the commissioner was asked: "Can I ask if this includes the record of the conversation of 17th October 2019 with SW's FOI Officer?"

14. In its correspondence with the Applicant, Scottish Water identified all of the information requested as being environmental information, as defined in regulation 2(1) of the EIRs. Having reached this conclusion, it applied section 39(2) of FOISA. Decision Notice 048/2020 Page 3

15. The Commissioner is satisfied that the withheld information, relating to the existence or otherwise of water connections for a built structure (and potentially including sewerage connections), falls within the definition of environmental information in regulation 2(1) of the EIRs, particularly paragraphs (a) and (c) (see Appendix 1 to this decision).

16. The Applicant has not disputed Scottish Water’s decision to deal with the request under the EIRs and, in what follows, the Commissioner will consider this case solely in terms of the EIRs. 

Part 3 – whether this was a request for information

17. In part 3 of his request, the Applicant asked for the law under which charges had been raised. The Applicant was also unhappy that the web links Scottish Water provided in its review outcome to the websites of Business Stream (the arm’s length subsidiary providing retail water and sewerage services to business customers) and The Water Industry Commissioner for Scotland did not answer this component of the request.

18. The Applicant submitted that section 27 of the 2005 Act contained the applicable law. The Applicant noted that a Scottish Water employee had stated in correspondence to him that “Scottish Water is responsible for deciding whether premises should be classed as ‘eligible premises’ in terms of s.27(1)(a)&(b) of the Water Services Etc. (Scotland) Act 2005.” In making such decisions, it submitted, Scottish Water must adhere to the law and therefore required to know the applicable law.

19. In the Commissioner’s view, having considered all relevant comments from the Applicant and taking a reasonable interpretation of the request, part 3 is inviting comment as to which law Scottish Water believes should apply in the circumstances. In effect, it is seeking a legal opinion rather than recorded information. While it is understandable that the Applicant might wish to know Scottish Water’s views on this, it is not the role of the EIRs to elicit such an opinion. The applicable law might well be found in section 27 of the 2005 Act, but that is a matter on which the Applicant should seek legal advice.

The applicant is disinterested in Scottish Water's Views. They are well known and documented by way of the Invoices that have been raised on the instruction of the Revenue Protection Department. What is NOT known is the Authority under which the instruction to raise said invoices was made. The Research Project has gone to considerable lengths to make this clear. Clearly this has NOT been successful. Raising an Invoice without the necessary authority is not uncommon and such scams plague industry.

20. Consequently, the Commissioner concludes that part 3 was not a request for recorded information. For this reason, he cannot consider it further here. Further discussions during the investigation have led to the disclosure of further information to the Applicant on the assessment of the premises in question as “eligible premises”: this does not, however, fall within the scope of any part of the Applicant’s request of 28 March 2019 (with the result that the Commissioner cannot consider it further here).. 

The standardised FOI has been amended in anattempt to further clarify the intent of the question.

Part 2 – whether any further information was held

21. Regulation 5(1) of the EIRs (subject to the various qualifications contained in regulations 6 to 12) requires a Scottish public authority which holds environmental information to make it available when requested to do so by any applicant. This obligation relates to information held by the authority when it receives a request.

22. In its application, the Applicant submitted that Scottish Water failed to provide the information, specifically in relation to the drainage connection at the premises in question.

23. Scottish Water understood the Applicant to be concerned about information relating to the physical location of the SPID. It explained that SPIDs are reference numbers used for billing purposes and are not mapped onto geographical locations. It also explained that it had already provided a copy of the GIS map it maintained for the purposes of section 11 of the Sewerage (Scotland) Act 1968, showing the location of all relevant drains. Decision Notice 048/2020 Page 4

24. In the circumstances, considering the explanations offered by Scottish Water on this point, the Commissioner is satisfied that it could not reasonably be expected to hold further information falling within the scope of part 2 of the request.

It is well known that Scottish Water's record of Infrastructure are seriously out of date. A SPID is simply that point in space where responsibility for delivery of water or collection of drainage takes place. It also defines the boundary up to which Scottish Water's maintenance and repair reponsibility ends and the Landlord's starts.

Using SPIDs for billing purposes is fine as long as they are not "alice in wonderland 'quasi spids' for non existent connections".

Other matters - Regulation 14 of the EIRs

25. Where a Scottish public authority has received a request to make environmental information available and does not hold that information, but believes that another public authority holds the information requested, then it must either- (a) transfer the request to the other authority; or (b) supply the applicant with the name and address of that other authority, and inform the applicant accordingly with the refusal sent in accordance with regulation 13.

26. As indicated above, during the investigation, Scottish Water was asked to comment on whether it considered regulation 14 of the EIRs was engaged in any way by this request (and, if so, whether Scottish Water considered it had complied with the regulation).

27. Scottish Water stated that it considered regulation 14 had been engaged by the request, and believed it had been dealt with in the review outcome (by supplying a link to relevant pages of the Business Stream website), including information on how to make an information request. It believed this was sufficient to comply with the terms of regulation 14, but accepted that the review outcome was not as clear on this point as it could have been. It apologised for any inconvenience this might have caused the Applicant.

28. Scottish Water also noted that its approach to regulation 14 was affected by a misapprehension as to the nature of the information being sought and whether any of that information was held by Scottish Water. During the investigation, it became clear that Scottish Water would hold information falling within the scope of the request (although this would appear to have been the information referred to in paragraph 20 above, outwith the scope of the request).

29. Having considered the submissions on this point, together with the review outcome referred to above (and leaving aside the question of whether it should have understood Business Stream to hold the requested information), the Commissioner is not satisfied that Scottish Water did consider regulation 14 adequately in dealing with the request or the requirement for review. A weblink was provided, certainly, but without clear instruction as to what use the Applicant might make of it (in terms of relevant information believed to be held elsewhere, and how that might be requested). It should also have been made clear that this was Scottish Water’s means of addressing that part of the request relating to Scottish Water’s subsidiaries (which are, of course, separate Scottish public authorities).

30. Consequently, the Commissioner is not inclined to accept that Scottish Water complied with regulation 14 at the time of the review. Given the explanations above, he does not require any action by Scottish Water on this point, in response to the application under consideration here. 

Decision

The Commissioner finds that, in the respects covered by the Applicant’s application, Scottish Water partially failed to comply with the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (the EIRs) in responding to the information request made by the Applicant.

Not sure what !

The Commissioner finds that Scottish Water was correct to inform the Applicant that it held no further information falling within the scope of part 2 of the request.

Probably true, given the state of their records.

However, the Commissioner also finds that Scottish Water failed to comply fully with regulation 14 of the EIRs in dealing with the request. Given explanations provided during the investigation, he does not require any action to be taken on this point, in response to the application.

In the Sunmmary the Commissioner states "but decided that its advice in its correspondence with the Applicant was misleading." And that does not requires serious bollocking ??? One email comes under the aegis of being a fradulent misrepresentation - 27th May 2019.

Appeal

Should either the Applicant or Scottish Water wish to appeal against this decision, they have the right to appeal to the Court of Session on a point of law only. Any such appeal must be made within 42 days after the date of intimation of this decision. 

Without the complete information which Scottish Water have provided the Commissioner, and which the Commissioner as not seen fit to provide the Applicant, and appeal is doomed immediately.

Margaret Keyse, Head of Enforcement, 11 March 2020 

Appendix 1: Relevant statutory provisions

There follows verbatim quotations from cluases 2, 5 ,10, and 14 of the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004. 

For Property Charges, and Drainage Charges. 

And this despite having eventually provided the information that the premises are NOT and "Eligible Premises" under Section 27 of the 2005 Act.

Scottish Water have not yet provided the requested information.
It is NOT expected that they will do so.

Dear xxxxxxxx

Application for Decision by the Scottish Information Commissioner Public Authority: Scottish Water

Just to advise that we received a call from {Reserach Project] on Friday afternoon after 3pm and my colleague took a message. He asked that I phone him back Monday afternoon. His phone was engaged so I have not as yet spoken with him.

As you are the applicant for yyyyyyyy, it may be better for me to email and phone you directly. Also your application form did expressly state he was not your legal adviser although you seem to have indicated subsequently that we can contact him. If you do wish to clarify this point this may also be helpful at this point in the case.

In the meantime, this case is still ongoing and proceeding to decision notice in line with current case load. I don’t yet have an idea of the date for the issue of a decision notice but I am happy to provide updates as and when there is more to report. I hope this will be helpful .

Kind Regards

Elaine Moffat

Dear [SIC Officer]

xxxxxxxx has forwarded your email to him to me.

For the record:

xxxxxxxx telephoned Margaret Hopkins on the morning of Thu, 17 Oct 2019.

My analysis of the information provided by Scottish Water was I believe forwarded to you. Copy attached.

He then passed the telephone to me. The record of my conversation is attached.

Margaret Hopkins latest response arrived a few minutes ago - and is herewith forwarded. You will see that she has requested Scottish Water's Legal Team to respond - providing either the information request but not yet supplied under the FOI, or a letter as outlined.

I refer to your email to [appellant] sent earlier today.

Re: Item 1
Self evidently, Scottish Water have NOT provided all the information requested. The Legal Team's response is awaited.

Re: Item 2
Scottish Water have indeed provided some more information, which has been analysed - which analysis is included above. They have not as yet provided the "Applicable Law" enabling the Revenue Protection Department to instruct the raising of charges for property and roads drainage.

I have just spoken to xxxxxxxxx and he confirms that he does not want to close the case.

As more information is to be provided, despite it being well out with the allowed time period, he is also prepared to await arrival of this further information prior to your decision.

[Research Project] cc xxxxxxxx

Nota Bene I trust that before your formal decision is made, you will send a draft to both xxxxxxxx and Scottish Water for comment so that it may become mutually acceptable. Otherwise the risk of not closing the matter satisfactorily will be the cause of considerable extra costs to many parties, including the state.

------- Forwarded message -------

From: FOI <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.> To: [Research Project] Cc: xxxxxxxx

Subject: yyyyyyyyy: Mon, 21 Oct 2019

Dear [Research Project],

Thank you for your recent email.

I have forwarded your request to my colleagues within the Scottish Water Legal Team, and they will respond to your query as soon as possible.

Please contact us if you have any further queries we may assist with.

Margaret Hopkins
FOI Officer
Customer Experience Reporting
Buchanan Gate Business Park
Cumbernauld Road | Glasgow | G33 6FB

Dear xxxxxxxx

I’m following up on our phone conversation just now.

My colleague John Kelly has been in touch with you (24 September 2019) and your adviser, [Reserach Project] (15 October 2019).

1. Information has been disclosed by Scottish Water

It is my understanding that you have now received information from Scottish Water which addresses your request - this was in the form of an email dated 1 October 2019 from Margaret Hopkins, FOI Officer at Scottish Water. It had a number of pdf files attached (entitled “Promise Notes”) and also an excel file (entitled [premises]) On the phone you confirmed you had received this information.

2. Your instructions – how do you wish to proceed?

You confirmed in our phone call that Scottish Water has disclosed the information to you (as above), you may or may not wish the Commissioner to issue a decision notice. If you are content to draw a line under matters (e.g. because you have now received the information) let me know so I can close the case. I will only do this if you instruct me to close the case ie withdraw your application.

It remains your right to ask the Commissioner to issue a decision notice so if I don’t hear from you, this is what we will do.

Kind Regards

Elaine Elaine Moffat

Freedom of Information Officer

Scottish Information Commissioner

Kinburn Castle, Doubledykes Road St Andrews, KY16 9DS

Noted firstly: that it is very difficult for some people to present an argument over the phone, especially when English is not their native language, and secondly: it is always better to have someone else do the talking. Lord Denning once remarked that a lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client.

[SW FOI Officer]

Re: Freedom of Information Request – XX99XX99XX99
Re: Freedom of Information Request Appeal - 99XX99XX99
Re: Scottish Information Commissioner's Reference: 99999999

I refer to our conversation this morning on xxxxxxxx's mobile phone whilst I was in his office.

To make it easy for you to pass on:

a) Section 27 is the applicable law. It states:
Under part (1) (a) there has to be a direct connection to a water supply provided by SW to enable Water Charges.
Under part (1) (b) there has to be a direct connection to a sewerage or drainage pipe provided by SW to enable Drainage Charges.

b) Under the FOI, you supplied further information emanating from the Revenue Protection Department as follows [which information should have been supplied before xxxxxxxx took his request to the Scottish Information Commissioner]:

Whilst it was concluded by a site survey that there is no toilet/sinks and no sewer connection within [premises], a separate water survey has confirmed that there is no water connection in this unit

See page 88 of 99 of the attached pdf - 20191009_2013-16_Promise_Notes_Markup

c) Thus, under section 27, yyyyyyyyy's premises are NOT an eligible premises.

d) xxxxxxxx has not been notified of the withdrawal of roads and property drainage charges, which needs to be in the form of a letter stating that where a premises has no water connection and no sewer connection then there will not be any roads drainage or property drainage charges, and it necessarily requires to be signed by someone with the appropriate authority.

e) the FACT that Scottish Water have not acted as above means that the Revenue Protection Department still consider that there is other "applicable law" which entitles them to instruct that such charges are levied.

Scottish Water's FOI department [yourself in this case] has failed to provide this information as requested under FOI.

Thus PLEASE either supply the requested additional "applicable law", or a letter stating the withdrawal of charges.

I confirm that the Templeton Business Centre operates in an appropriate manner with the Landlord's common Areas forming the Eligible Premises upon which charges are raised.

Please feel free to communicate directly with me in this matter, and if it is by email, please copy in xxxxxxxx.

This was executed by way of forwarding an email from the Research Project to Scottish Water.

Thank you for forwarding the information from Scottish Water which you received on 1st October.

Attached our analysis of the information that has been supplied.

They have tried to improve the response re the applicable law, made mention of why they have made redactions and have included a large volume of correspondence included within their Oracle database - as opposed to their other records except for a spreadsheet - about which we have raised concerns.

They admit to not keeping adequate records, which is not surprising in an organisation which appears to consider that bullying is perfectly acceptable.

The important fact is that they have still not supplied the applicable law under which they have raised property drainage and roads drainage charges. Noted that there is a ministerial direction that they should do, but there is no justification for doing so - as explained by Sheriff Reid in a recent judgement.

Basically if the Minister wishes to change Section 27, then an amendment to the law should be proposed in Parliament as was done recently in 2012.

Furthermore, within the morass of records from their Oracle database there is absolutely no mention of either the property drainage or the roads drainage charges being authorised - just statements which typically read "Roads Drainage: Yes" Noted that all but one of the documents supplied have a note to say that a record has been truncated. It is important that these truncated records be made available.

It appears that various departments involved all have different views and all pull in different directions resulting in what is best termed a shambles. The over riding decision is made by the Revenue Protection Department without providing any lawful basis for their decision.

It is wholly amazing how many visits to site were made, and how many changes to status.

So in summary:

a) SW admit to not keeping adequate records,
b) They use inadequate methods for record keeping - using both spreadsheets, and a database without adequate capability,
c) The specific locations of SPID's have not been provided.
d) They have not addressed the key issue regarding the LAW for raising Roads Drainage and Property Drainage charges.
e) The data generated by the Revenue Protection Department evidencing Eligibility has not been provided.
f) They have demonstrated being administratively what is best described as a shambles - as is common in many "state industries". Thus they have still failed to provide the data requested.

I would suggest that you forward this email to: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., and cc it to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and also to the Information Commissioner's staff member This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

It is just appalling that something in Nairobi in the 1970's which would have been sorted out in one visit by a competent junior engineer or surveyor and resolved within a day or so has drifted on for over five years. Quite unbelievable - bit like Brexit !

Dear xxxxxxx,

I refer to yyyyyyyyy’s application to the Scottish Information Commissioner for a decision regarding your original request dated 1 April 2019 which Scottish Water processed under the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRS) under the exemption contained in section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002. One of the outstanding matters is Scottish Water's full response to part c) of your original request:

“The applicable law; that is the law (as opposed to any rules) under which you have raised a (probably erroneous) charge."

The request for review dated 24th April 2019 provided further statements around the determination of "eligible premises" pursuant to Section 27 of the Water Services etc. (Scotland) Act 2005. Scottish Water's interpretation was that the information being sought related to the law under which non-household customers are charged for water and sewerage. Given that it is Licensed Providers who are responsible for billing customers, the information supplied in the response outlined why Scottish Water believed the information would be held by Business Stream, the Licensed Provider in this case. However, Scottish Water accepts that the reviewed response was not as clear as it could have been and we apologise for any inconvenience that this may have caused.

In light of the additional information provided in the application for appeal Scottish Water are now clear that you are seeking:

"I would ask that the records of the Revenue Protection Department relating to the assessment of [premises] as an Eligible Premises be made available."

The standardised FOI has now been revised to make this clear.

Searches have now been carried out to establish what information Scottish Water holds in relation to the assessment of [premises] as "eligible premises".

When determining whether a property is "eligible premises", Scottish Water needs to establish whether it is, or is to be, connected for public water or sewerage system.

At that time, records were not typically kept of those checks and there are none for this property. Having searched our systems, the only records we have located relating to this property are enclosed (please refer to Excel spreadsheet "[premises]"). We have no further records other than transactions showing that the property was registered in 2012.

We hold a number of entries relating to the property from February 2013. The matters covered by the attached notes mainly relate to deregistering the property for water and waste services (and accordingly the removal of water and foul sewerage charges for the property). Copies of the full notes are attached.

Some 66 pages of notes were attached. These are available upon This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. . . . 

Some Information has been redacted because it constitutes personal information of which you are the data subject and in this instance an exception under regulation 11(1) (personal data) of the EIRs applies. When a person contacts Scottish Water in a personal capacity, the ensuing communications between Scottish Water and the person are personal data and therefore subject to GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA). The reference number is personal data as it is unique to an individual and when combined with other data held by Scottish Water, allows living individuals to be identified. Such information is personal data and has been withheld from disclosure.

Other redactions have been made because the information constitutes the personal data of third parties (this covers Scottish Water employees/ contractors) and therefore exempt information under regulation 11(2) of the EIRS in conjunction with regulation 11(3)(a)(i) on the basis that it would not be fair for the redacted information to be disclosed and there are no reasons to interfere with employees’ rights to expect privacy. The exemption is absolute, so it is not subject to the public interest test.

Amazingly the redactions are incomplete and some names were not removed !

The comment: ..."Note detail exceeds 2000 characters so has been truncated." was found in many cases. This is a formatting problem in their report generator, or it might be that they did not wish to reveal the contents.

One last point which we wish to cover is the metered supply arrangements for the property. Scottish Water's records here show that there is a single metered supply to [neighbouring premises] recording consumption in its kitchens and toilets. [Premises] had previously been charged for unmeasured water, unmeasured foul sewerage, property drainage and roads drainage charges. A survey of all of the units at [Landlord's estate] established that only [neighbouring premises] had a water supply so the unmeasured water and unmeasured foul sewerage charges were removed from [premises] at that time with backdated effect. We hold some entries relating to this, which you will find in the attached documents.

If our understanding of your request is incorrect or you require any further clarification please contact me to discuss on 0141 483 0691 and I will be happy to talk through your questions with you or you can submit your query by email to FOI@ Scottishwater.co.uk.

Yours sincerely

Margaret Hopkins
FOI Officer
Customer Experience Reporting
Buchanan Gate Business Park
Cumbernauld Road | Glasgow | G33 6FB

Dear xxxxxxxx

I refer to your email below and advise that I called you on 17 September 2019.

I told you that I was calling on behalf of Elaine Moffat, who is the case officer.

During the telephone call I told you that Scottish Water had carried out further searches and that in an effort to resolve the matter to your satisfaction, it had suggested that it could provide you with a further response at this stage.I said that I hoped the further response would satisfy your application and you confirmed you would be happy to receive a further response form Scottish Water.

I advised that I would contact Scottish Water and ask it to provide you with the further response. I further advised that once you had received this further response, I would contact you to ascertain whether this further response had satisfied your application, and if it did whether you would be content to withdraw your application for a decision.

I can advise that I did contact Scottish Water and was advised that they would issue you with a further response, which I hoped would be delivered to you sometime this week. As we discussed, if Scottish Water has not provided you with a response by Thursday, I will chase the matter up.

Should you wish to discuss the matter further, I can be contacted on 01334 464610. I thank you for your assistance in this matter.

Yours sincerely

John Kelly

Freedom of Information Officer

Dear Sir,

I refer to your email of 17th July 2019, your ref SIC Ref: 999999999 and to a telephone call I received on Friday 20th September 2019.

I was in a meeting when you rang, so I was unable to take adequate notes. Please confirm the advice in the email.

Please also confirm when you are going to formally answer my request for a review of the FOI that I raised with Scottish Water.

Dear xxxxxxx

Application for Decision by the Scottish Information Commissioner
Public Authority: Scottish Water

I refer to our email of 5 June 2019, acknowledging receipt of your application for a decision from the Commissioner relating to water supply and drainage, routes and locations. Your application appears to be valid in terms of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA)/Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (the EIRs). The Commissioner will therefore investigate your complaint and, in due course, issue a decision on your case.

[The remainder of the email details subsequent process]

Thank you for your email of 04 June 2019, applying for a decision from the Scottish Information Commissioner about the way in which Scottish Water dealt with your information request.

Your application will now be passed to our Validation Team to check. There are various legal requirements which must be fulfilled before the Commissioner has the power to conduct an investigation.

[The remainder of the email details subsequent process]

Dear Sirs,

Please find attached a zip file containing 14 pdf documents including the Application, and a schedule of documents.

I have had assistance in completing the form, turning emails into pdf format, and in the collation of the relevant documents from [the Research Project]. Please note: he does NOT represent me or my company.

I look forward to your response in due course, but meanwhile please acknowledge receipt of this email.

For the attention of: Lidia Niemczuk-Greer.

I refer to your email dated 23rd May, 2019.

In respect of item 1, I concur that you cannot have any information as to a water supply, as there isn't one to [premises].

In respect of item 2, the lack of information provided confirms that Scottish Water have no connection between [premises] and the public drainage systems.

As a consequence, [premises] cannot therefore be declared an eligible premises under section 27 of the 2005 Act.

I am dissatisfied with your response to item 3. Please see this page on the website of the project which has been researching water charges for some years: http://unaccountablescotland.org.uk/index.php/water-charges/58-water-charges-emails-with-scottish-water-srevenue-protection-department#email-from-scottish-water-revenue-protection-department-dated-31-jan-2018.

In my request for a review, I gave adequate reasoning as to why Scottish Water should have the information requested. In the link above (which is for the second email in the conversation), the manager of the Revenue Protection Department states as follows:

..however Scottish Water is responsible for deciding whether premises should be classed as "eligible premises" in terms of s.27(1)(a)&(b) of the water services etc (Scotland) Act 2005.

In making this decision, Scottish Water must adhere to the law, and that requires knowledge of the applicable law. This is the information requested. I shall now be requesting the Scottish information Commissioner to review your response.

Dear Ms Berry 

Your email to xxxxxxxx has been forwarded to me.

First of all, in no way do I represent xxxxxxxx as indicated by the statement in your email which reads: 

You indicated that your representative, who you identified as ?????, will contact me in connection with the points which you raised. 

Please visit this web site: http://unaccountablescotland.org.uk/index.php/water-charges 

This research project continues as more and more cases arise. The concept of the FOI raised recently by xxxxxxx was conceived some years ago. The project then set about collecting information and evidence that illustrates the adverse methodologies applied by your employer - through its employees et al - to small business's. 

So the project already has some of the information [appellant] has requested from Scottish Water, particularly in relation to the third item, the applicable law. 

Thus we can say with some certainty, that your employer's response to xxxxxx's FOI is inadequate, and the project has so advised xxxxxxx. 

The project will make available such information as is necessary to enable xxxxxxx to proceed to the Scottish Information Commissioner with some confidence. 

You will note that this research project is an open one, and thus all relevant communications are published. This will include inter alia your email to xxxxxxx, and indeed this one.

Neither I, nor the research project, enter into correspondence with, and certainly do not take phone calls from, persons who actively engage in what is best described as "bullying tactics" - which is how your email to [appellant] is construed by the project. 

Please ensure that you address any further communications to xxxxxx, or his authorised and appointed representatives. Research projects by their nature cannot under any circumstances be involved in providing specific assistance in any specific case, although the project does publish typical formats when requested, and it seems to be appropriate - much as https:// www.equalityadvisoryservice.com/ does.

Dear [xxxxxxxx]

I refer to our discussions in respect of your request for information under freedom of information legislation. From our discussions, I understood that you contend that charges for water and/or wastewater services have been incorrectly applied in respect of your premises and you hoped to obtain information which would assist you in this connection.

Although Scottish Water is unable to provide all of the documents you had hoped for, because Scottish Water doesn’t hold documents falling within the scope of your request, I confirm that we will liaise with your licensed provider to address your concerns regarding the charging arrangements at your premises.

Such Information was later provided on the 1st October [see document of that date above] once the Scottish Information Commissioner became involved.

You indicated that your representative, who you identified as ?????, will contact me in connection with the points which you raised. As discussed, I will need to contact your licensed provider, Business Stream, to arrange for your charges to be reviewed and I confirm that I shall do so once I have heard from your representative.

This of course is absolute nonsense as it is Scottish Water's Revenue Protection Department who determine what charges are to be paid. It is wholly misleading - to wit in our opinion it may be a Fradulent Misrepresentation. BBM Solicitors state as follows:

Crucially in fraudulent misrepresentation there is no dubiety. The statement is inaccurate and the intention is to use the inaccuracy to deliberately deceive.

I look forward to hearing from your representative.

Yours sincerely
Shavonne Berry

Legal Counsel I Scottish Water
Castle House, 6 Castle Drive, Dunfermline, KY11 8GG
Mobile: 07825 822 873

Dear [xxxxxxxx],

Thank you for your e-mail of 24th April 2019 requesting a review of your original request of 1 April 2019 which we processed under the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRS) under the exemption contained in section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002.

Your review request for information was for the following: [cites the request verbatim - see documemt prior to this one below]

In response to points 1-3, please note the following:

1) Scottish Water provided all information that is held on record in relation to water and waste water infrastructure for 11 Forth Street. We do not hold any further documentation that falls within your request.

2) Neither the water meter nor the location of Supply Point id (SPID) are shown on GIS mapping system as they are not permanent physical assets.

We beg to differ. All Water Meters - both those installed for revenue purposes, as well as control purposes known as bulk meters. Both are shown on up to date maps according to the Legend to the Maps that was provided.

3) We do endeavour to provide information whenever possible. However, in this instance an exception under section s.10(4a) (information not held) of EIR applies to the information requested. This is because Scottish Water does not hold records of the financial details of Business Stream. Whilst we are both part of the Scottish Water group, we are legally separate companies and strict rules ensure that we stay separate to ensure a level playing
field for all competitors in the non-domestic market. Scottish Water is the wholesaler of water in Scotland whilst Business Stream is one of a number of licensed providers of water. This means that Scottish Water owns and operates the country’s water infrastructure, while Business Stream provides retail water and sewerage services to the country’s businesses.

To help explain further I have provided a link to the Business Stream website, https://www.business-stream.co.uk/governance-and-compliance/ and the Water Commissioner’s website https://www.watercommission.co.uk/UserFiles/Documents/130515%20Section%2011%20direction%202013.pdf both of which provide an explanation into the governance and compliance of Business Stream and their relationship with Scottish Water that you may find helpful.

One is entertained to see that Business Stream's governance document covers England as well - but not Wales ....

As the exception is conditional, we are required to apply the ‘public interest test’. This means we have, in all the circumstances of this case, considered if the public interest in disclosing information outweighs the public interest in applying the exception. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exception. While we recognise that there may be some public interest in information about charges you have issued clearly we cannot provide information which we do not hold.

I understand that you have spoken to my colleague Shavonne Berry, from our Legal team, and she will contact Business Stream in respect of the charging arrangements at your premises.

If you have any queries regarding your FOI request please feel free to contact me and I will be happy to assist. You can do this by contacting the following email address This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

You have a right to submit an appeal to the Scottish Information Commissioner if you are not satisfied with this response within six months of the date of this email.

Further information can be obtained from the Commissioner's website at www.itspublicknowledge.info and from Scottish Water's appeal document attached.

Further information on the appeals procedure can be obtained from the attached document and the Commissioner's website at www.itspublicknowledge.info/Appeal.

Yours sincerely

Kind regards,
Lidia Niemczuk-Greer
FOI Officer
M:+44 (0)7501 471924

No address given. 

Thank you for your e-mail of 24 April 2019 requesting a review of your original request of 19 April 2019 which we processed under the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRS) under the exemption contained in section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 that that we have logged under the above reference number.

We have 20 working days to reply to your request and you are due a response on or before the 23 May 2019.

We will endeavour to get a response to you as soon as we can.

If you have any queries regarding your FOI request please feel free to contact me, quoting the above reference number, and I will be happy to assist.

Please refer to your response by email from Margaret Hopkins, dated 19th April 2019

The response is inadequate for the following reasons.

1) Location.

The plan of the water and sewerage infrastructure provided relates to the street, and NOT specifically to the Unit. More particularly it appears to relate to a Restaurant which is a separate and unconnected premises.

2) Water Meter and SPID

• No water meter is shown; one exists for the Restaurant.
• SPID(s) for the Unit are neither shown nor the reference(s) provided.

3) Applicable Law.

The request made is as follows

The law (as opposed to any rules) under which you have raised a charge.

Notes:

• The word “you” includes Scottish Water and its subsidiary Scottish Water Business Stream.
• It is understood that the liability for charges, viz the determination as to whether a premises is an “Eligible Premises” (and thus liable for charges) under Section 27 of the 2005 Act is made by Scottish Water's Revenue Protection Department.
• It is understood that this information is passed to the default “supplier” who then raises an invoice for the charges. The default supplier is Scottish Water Business Stream.
• Scottish Water “sell” the water supplied to Scottish Water Business Stream at the point of supply, viz a meter if one exists, or at some defined reference point known as a SPID (presumably the Supply Point Identificaton).
• Once the water has been sold to Scottish Water Business Stream, ownership immediately passes to the recipient, who may then do what they will with it.
• Thus Scottish Water Business Stream have no function with regards to handling water save raising an invoice for charges per the information supplied by Scottish Water.
• A similar situation exists for the collection of sewerage.

The response made was:

Therefore the information is exempt under s.10(4a) of EIR on the basis that the requested information is not held by Scottish Water.

This response is wrong as it is Scottish Water's Revenue Protection Department who determine the status of a premises under Section 27 of the 2005 Act.

If the response implies that the Scottish Water make this determination without due regard to the Laws of Scotland, then it becomes impossible for business's to operate in a fair and reasonable environment.

The conclusion is that it must be in the Public Interest for a business to be able to read and understand the Law regarding their liability for charges, and for Scottish Water to abide by the same Laws.

Thus your response is found to be inadequate, and you are required to review your response.

Water charges

Thank you for your request for information which we processed under the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRS) under the exemption contained in section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002.

Your request for information was for the following:

1. Routes and locations of Scottish Water’s water mains, stop valves, and water meters which form the supply to the solum of the premises, indicating also the reference and physical location of the SPID;

2. Routes and locations of Scottish Water’s main drains whether it be for Storm Water, Foul water, or combined Water into which the solum of the premises drains, indicating also the reference and physical location of the SPID;

3. The applicable law; that is the law (as opplosed to any rules) under which you have raised a (probably erroneous) charge.

In response to the points 1-2 please see attached GIS drawing. I have also included a GIS legend for ease of reference.

The plan is grossly out of date for the following reasons:

• The unit subject of the FOI is NOT shown, just the "undivided" address. 
• The descriptive information of adjoining properties is out of date.
• The water meter [whether bulk or revenue] is not shown.
• The GIS legend reference includes symbols for both Revenue and Bulk meters.

Re item 3. A competitive water market in Scotland came into force effective from 1st April 2008 for non-household premises. Enabled by the Water Services etc. (Scotland) Act 2005 which outlines that non-household customers must receive water and or waste water services from a Licensed Provider, also known as retailers. In this regard, since 2008, Scottish Water acts as a wholesaler for nonhousehold premises and remains responsible for the maintenance and repair of its water and waste water infrastructure across Scotland. It sells water and or waste water services to Licensed Providers who in turn provide these applicable services to non-household customers. Therefore the information is exempt under s.10 (4a) of EIR on the basis that the requested information is not held by Scottish Water. To help explain we can only supply the information which we have record of and in this instance I am unable to provide the information requested.

As anticipated, the response contains information that was NOT requested.

However, we already know that Scottish Water's Revenue Protection Department generate this information - please click here.

As the exception is conditional we are required to apply the ‘public interest test’. This means we have, in all the circumstances of this case, considered if the public interest in disclosing information outweighs the public interest in applying the exception. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exception. While we recognise that there may be some public interest in information about charges you have issued clearly we cannot provide information which we do not hold.

The "Public Interest" test has not been properly applied. It is clearly in the public interest to know what the law is and how Scottish Water apply it.

I thought it may be useful to provide a link to the government website www.scotlandontap.gov.uk which explains how the competitive market
works.

If you have any queries regarding your FOI request please feel free to contact me and I will be happy to assist.

You can do this by contacting the following email address This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

You can seek a review of this response within forty working days and thereafter appeal to the Scottish Information Commissioner.

Further information on the appeals procedure can be obtained from the attached document and the Commissioner's website at
www.itspublicknowledge.info/Appeal.

Yours sincerely

Margaret Hopkins
FOI Officer
Customer Experience Reporting
Buchanan Gate Business Park
Cumbernauld Road | Glasgow | G33 6FB
Tel: 0141 483 0691
Mobile: 07435 764661
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Scottish Water - Trusted to Serve Scotland

Interesting comment "Trusted to serve Scotland" - when to most tenants the reverse appears to be true of their commercial side.

Thank you for your email of Thursday 4th April 2019 acknowledging of my FOI on 1st April 2019, and requesting further information. Noted that you have decided to classify the FOI under the Environmental information (Scotland) Regulations 2004.

Your reply was referred to the Scottish Information Commissioner's office, and Elaine Moffat who has advised as follows:

1. That the Environmental information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 are applicable,
2. That there is sufficient information contained in the address for you to identify the requested information,
3. That the time for reply therefore runs from 1st April 2019.

Dear [Name],

Thank you for your request dated 1 April 2019 under the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRs) for all the correspondence in relation to water charges at xxxxxxx.

Ok, so they want to use a different set of regulations - which are virtually identical. Having examined the meaning of the word "environmental" in its context vis-a-vis the EIR, any reasonable Engineer would probably disagree - but as the net effect on the answer to the three questions is the same, it is pointless to take umbridge.

In order to identify and locate the information that you have asked for I need some further information from you. To allow me to search Scottish Water’s corporate systems it would be helpful if you could provide more detailed information on the charges you have received and from whom the charge has come from.

The address of a property is unique in the Postal Address File published by Royal Mail. So that is just a delaying tactic.

As I am unable to continue without this, I will put your request on hold until I hear back from you. When we receive this further information from you we will be able to respond to your request, in accordance with FOISA, within 20 working days of when we receive that information.

If you wish to discuss any of the above, please contact me on either 0141 483 0691 or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. You may also find it helpful to look at the Scottish Information Commissioner’s ‘Tips for requesting information under FOI and the EIRs’ on his website at: http://www.itspublicknowledge.info/YourRights/Tipsforrequesters.aspx.

Yours sincerely

Margaret Hopkins

FOI Officer
Customer Experience Reporting
Buchanan Gate Business Park
Cumbernauld Road
Glasgow
G33 6FB

So the response comes from a different address, and appears to be from a 

FOI Team.
Scottish Water
55 Buckstone Terrace,
Edinburgh,
EH10 6XH.

[Date]

Dear Sir/ Madam

Freedom of Information Request.

I apply to be supplied with the following information under the terms of information(Scotland) Act 2002. The recorded information held by the Scottish Water and or any of its subsidiaries regarding the locations of the following in connection with the premises at [Address] 

1. Routes and locations of Scottish Water’s water mains, stop valves, and water meters which form the supply to the solum of the premises, indicating also the reference and physical location of the SPID;
2. Routes and locations of Scottish Water’s main drains whether it be for Storm Water, Foul water, or combined Water into which the solum of the premises drains, indicating also the reference and physical location of the SPID;
3. The applicable law; that is the law (as opposed to any rules) under which you have raised a (probably erroneous) charge.

Note that the premises, as far as any reasonable person can tell, is NOT an Eligible Premises under Section 27 of 2005 Water Act.

Yours Faithfully