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.
Request
Q1. Involvement in Investigations: Could you confirm if your police force is involved in any investigations into the illegal sale or supply of weight loss products? If so, please provide a summary of your force’s role and any actions taken to date.
Q2. Geographic Areas: Could you specify the geographic regions within your jurisdiction where investigations into the illegal sale of weight loss products are taking place?
Q3. Enforcement Actions: Can you provide details of any enforcement actions, such as arrests, seizures, or prosecutions, that your police force has undertaken in relation to this matter?
Q4.Investigation Status: If possible, could you provide an update on the status of these investigations? Are any of them ongoing, or have they resulted in any criminal charges?
Decision
Your request for information has now been considered and North Yorkshire police can neither confirm nor deny (NCND) that information is held as the duty in S1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) does not apply by virtue of the following exemptions:
Section 40(5B)(a)(i) - Personal Information
Section 30 (3) - Investigations
Section 31(3) – Law Enforcement
Section 17 of the Act required North Yorkshire 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. Please see the relevant exemption headers below for further information.
Section 40(5B)(a)(i) – Personal Information
(5B) The duty to confirm or deny does not arise in relation to other information if or to the extent that any of the following applies—
(a) giving a member of the public the confirmation or denial that would have to be given to comply with section 1(1)(a)—
(i) would (apart from this Act) contravene any of the data protection principles,
Once information is disclosed under the the Act I there is no control or limits as to who or how the information is shared with other individuals. Therefore a release under the Act is considered a disclosure to the world in general.
To confirm or deny that North Yorkshire Police hold or do not hold information about an individual in relation to a specific matter could potentially disclose information about a living, identifiable individual. This would amount to a release into the public domain of personal information about an individual. The individual in question would have no expectation that this information would be released into the public domain, and therefore their rights under the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA) and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) would be breached by release.
In this instance, processing this information (by issuing a confirmation or denial) would breach the first principle, that of ‘lawful, fair and transparent’ processing. When balancing the legitimate interests of the public against the interests of the individual and the harm and distress that would be caused by a confirmation or denial, the processing of information in this way becomes unlawful and Section 40(5A)(a)(i) is made out.
Section 30 – Investigations is a prejudice based qualified exemptions and any prejudice (harm) that confirming or denying information is held would cause must be articulated as well as the public interest considerations.
Section 31 – Law Enforcement is a prejudice based qualified exemptions and any prejudice (harm) that confirming or denying information is held would cause must be articulated as well as the public interest considerations.
Evidence of Harm
Section 30 and Section 31 are quite often used in conjunction with each other when applying the neither confirm nor deny stance in order to protect whether or not an investigation may have been conducted.
To confirm or deny whether information is held in relation to any alleged criminal activity of an individual/s would be likely to prejudice law enforcement functions of preventing and detecting crime, apprehending and prosecuting offenders. Issuing confirmation or denial responses in relation to any allegations, except for those that have already been publicly confirmed, would enable the public to build up a picture of who may have been subject of any allegations. This would be prejudicial to policing functions, as individuals including victims may be less willing to come forward or assist with our enquiries if they were to believe that this information may become public knowledge and them identified.
Public interest considerations favouring confirming or denying whether the information is held (S30)
The Police Service has a duty to conduct criminal investigations and by providing information held would help the public interest and provide transparency of policing operations.
Public interest considerations favouring neither confirming nor denying whether the information is held (S30)
Any information generated by an investigation needs to be treated with sensitivity. In some cases, it is the confirmation, or otherwise, about who may be the subject of any such investigations, which would disclose facts that would prejudice the evidence gathering within an investigation.
In addition, it would not be in the public interest to disclose information (even inadvertently, through a confirmation or denial) which could identify investigative activities, and subsequently undermine those processes. To do so would hinder the prevention or detection of crime, and apprehension and prosecution of offenders.
Public interest considerations favouring confirming or denying whether the information is held (S31)
Confirming or denying whether information is held regarding allegations made by or against individuals, would allow the public to see where the public funds are being spent and show the police service to be open and transparent in regards to its activities.
Public interest considerations favouring neither confirming nor denying whether the information is held (S31)
To confirm or deny that law enforcement holds information on any individual/s in relation to this matter has the potential to damage [force] Police’s ability to prevent and detect crime or apprehend or prosecute offenders in any associated allegations or cases, including tactics and/or reveal sources of information.
Balance Test
After weighing up the competing interests I have determined that the Public Interest favours the application of the NCND stance in respect of your request.
I consider that the benefit that would result from issuing a confirmation or denial does not outweigh the considerations favouring the NCND response. To confirm or deny the existence of the requested information, would allow interested parties to gain an upper hand and awareness of policing decisions used during investigations, leading to an increase of harm to either the investigation itself or the subject of the investigation.
To confirm or deny whether we hold this information would do little to further the public interest arguments, and in fact would have a negative impact upon North Yorkshire Police’s abilities to protect public safety and the promise of confidentiality inherent in our communications with those assisting with our enquiries.
Therefore, for the reasons set out above, I have found the balance test favours neither confirmation or denial and accordingly refuse your application.
Please note that systems used for recording information are not generic, nor are the procedures used locally in capturing the data. It should be noted therefore that this force’s response to your questions should not be used for comparison purposes with any other responses you may receive.