28/01/2025, a FoIA request was made of West Midlands Police (WMP) about their citing section 177 of the Data Protection Act (DPA), the request, ‘Offences under s.177 Data Protection Act‘, failed to uncover pertinent information about the constabulary’s accusation, their ‘warning’:
‘West Midlands Police has reviewed the correspondence sent to you, we do not believe it was appropriate that the paragraph which we consider our “warning” to prevent enforced SARs to have been included.
Any personal data held by any organisation must be protected, but by its very nature, the information held by law enforcement agencies is often more coveted, and there are individuals who attempt to obtain information through dishonest means. The warning about enforced SARs is intended to be used for these dishonest individuals who are attempting to access information of others with some malicious intent.
I am aware that there is no ill-intent behind the requests you have submitted, and I would like to apologise that this warning was issued to you without proper cause.’
WMP ref. FoIA1359A/25 refers.
Having failed to obtain the information anticipated or any assurance that the concerns raised about the accusation of ‘section 177’ and ‘enforced SAR’ had been addressed, a further FoIA request was made under the title ‘Yours ref 1359A/25‘
WMP’s stance remains ‘no information held’.
22/12/2025, a letter was sent to WMP as a final pre-escalation communication before referral of the matter to the Information Commissioner
30/12/2025, the matter was presented to the ICO accompanied by explanatory text:
FOI reference: 1359A/25
Internal Review references: 1447A/25 and 1613A/25
I requested recorded information explaining the origin, use, and governance of wording included in correspondence sent to me by West Midlands Police, which referenced prosecution under Data Protection Act section 177.
The request was intended to capture recorded organisational information, including (but not limited to):
- templates or standard wording,
- paragraph banks,
- guidance or training material,
- approval or governance records,
- version history or amendments,
- and any records evidencing how or why such wording came to be used.
West Midlands Police ultimately asserted that no recorded information is held relating to the “application and relevance” of the wording used.
The Internal Review response did not:
- address whether a template or standard wording exists or existed,
- explain what searches were undertaken,
- identify systems searched or search terms used,
- or address the provenance or governance of the wording.
I was subsequently advised that internal review rights were exhausted and directed to the ICO.
I am dissatisfied because:
- The authority failed to address the scope of the request.
Once it was accepted that the wording was based on a template or standard paragraph, the request necessarily captured the template itself and its document-control history. This was not addressed. - The “no information held” position is inadequately reasoned.
Where wording was acknowledged to be inappropriate, incorrectly cited a specific statutory provision, and was later apologised for, it is reasonable to expect recorded organisational information to exist. - No explanation of searches was provided.
The authority has not explained what systems were searched, what terms were used, or who conducted the searches. - The request was incorrectly reframed as opinion-seeking.
The request concerns recorded information (templates, guidance, approvals), not personal interpretation. - Delay compounds the concern.
Concerns were first raised in late 2024, with substantive engagement occurring many months later, increasing the importance of transparency around record-keeping and searches.
West Midlands Police has asserted that no recorded information is held relating to the wording used in correspondence referencing Data Protection Act section 177.
That position is not supported by an explanation of reasonable searches, as required by the Commissioner’s guidance.
In particular:
- Templates and standard wording
The wording was described as being derived from a template or standard paragraph; the constabulary’s ‘warning’. Templates are, by definition, recorded information. No searches of template repositories or document libraries have been explained. - Specific statutory reference
The wording cited section 177 of the Data Protection Act, a specific and incorrect reference in context. This is inherently keyword-searchable (“177”, “s177”, “enforced subject access”). - Governance and guidance
If staff are instructed to include legal warnings of this nature, it is reasonable to expect recorded guidance, training material, or approval records to exist. - Search explanation absent
The authority has not stated:- which systems were searched;
- what keywords were used;
- what date ranges were applied; or
- who conducted the searches.
In the absence of this information, the “no information held” conclusion cannot be reliably assessed.
I ask the Commissioner to determine whether West Midlands Police complied with its obligations under the Freedom of Information Act, in particular:
- whether reasonable and proportionate searches were conducted; and
- whether further searches and/or disclosure are required.
I seek an order requiring the authority to:
- conduct adequate searches; and
- either disclose the recorded information held or properly explain why none is held.
Supporting documents can be located at https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/yours_ref_1359a25