← Back to imported archive search
Tiger`s Roar `Loan Busting`.
Source: WhatDoTheyKnow
Authority: HM Revenue and Customs
Status: The request was
refused
by
HM Revenue and Customs
.
Imported path: /opt/loancharge/imports/wdtk/requests/tigers_roar_loan_busting
Open original request on WhatDoTheyKnow
Imported text
SOURCE: WhatDoTheyKnow
SOURCE_URL: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/tigers_roar_loan_busting
TITLE: Tiger`s Roar `Loan Busting`.
AUTHORITY: HM Revenue and Customs
AUTHORITY_URL: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/hmrc
STATUS: The request was
refused
by
HM Revenue and Customs
.
REQUEST_SLUG: tigers_roar_loan_busting
CAPTURED_AT: 2026-05-19T07:16:50+00:00
PROVENANCE: {"first_seen_at": "2026-05-18T12:55:11", "first_seen_page": "3", "first_query_term": "\"Loan Charge\"", "first_date_after": "2022/01/01", "first_date_before": "2023/01/01", "matched_query_terms": "\"Loan Charge\"", "matched_date_ranges": "2022/01/01 to 2023/01/01", "first_search_url_template": "https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/search/%22Loan%20Charge%22/requests?commit=Filter&query=%22Loan+Charge%22&request_date_after=2022%2F01%2F01&request_date_before=2023%2F01%2F01&request_variety%5B%5D=sent&request_variety%5B%5D=response&request_variety%5B%5D=comment&sortby=&utf8=%E2%9C%93&page="}
ATTACHMENTS:
- FOI2022_06559.pdf | https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/tigers_roar_loan_busting/response/1984617/attach/3/FOI2022%2006559.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1 | application/pdf | 206787 bytes
- [not downloaded] | https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/tigers_roar_loan_busting/response/1984617/attach/html/3/FOI2022%2006559.pdf.html | | 0 bytes
- IR_blank_template_IR2022_12116_JM.AW_cleared.fin_v2.pdf | https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/tigers_roar_loan_busting/response/2021731/attach/3/IR%20blank%20template%20IR2022%2012116%20JM.AW%20cleared.fin%20v2.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1 | application/pdf | 179782 bytes
- [not downloaded] | https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/tigers_roar_loan_busting/response/2021731/attach/html/3/IR%20blank%20template%20IR2022%2012116%20JM.AW%20cleared.fin%20v2.pdf.html | | 0 bytes
================================================================================
MESSAGE 1 [outgoing]
HEADER: Mr. Christopher Robinson
22 February 2022
Delivered
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear HM Revenue and Customs,
Following on from FOI2021-24757, Contained within the text of the Newsletter `The Tiger`s Roar' under `Loan Busting' you state that you are currently working with the promoters/ enablers of them [Loan Schemes]. Could you please confirm or deny if this was actually the case and if any correspondence/ Metadata was produced?
Yours faithfully,
Mr. Christopher Robinson
================================================================================
MESSAGE 2 [incoming]
HEADER: FOI Central Team,
HM Revenue and Customs
22 February 2022
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our ref: FOI2022/06559
Dear Mr Robinson,
Freedom of Information Act 2000 Acknowledgement
Thank you for your communication of 22 February.
We have allocated the above reference which you should quote if you need
to contact us.
We will arrange for a reply to be sent to you which will either comply
with our obligations under Freedom of Information Act or, if we think it's
an enquiry that we don't need to address under the terms of the Act, let
you know why. If it is the latter we will, if possible, pass it on to a
more appropriate part of the Department for answer.
While we aim to respond to all freedom of information requests within 20
working days, if for some reason this timescale cannot be complied with,
we will, where possible, write to you explaining the reason for the delay
and provide an estimated time for response.
Yours sincerely
HMRC Freedom of Information Team
================================================================================
MESSAGE 3 [incoming]
HEADER: FOI Central Team,
HM Revenue and Customs
28 February 2022
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Attachment
FOI2022 06559.pdf
201K
View
Download
Dear Mr Robinson,
We are writing in response to your request for information, received 22
February.
Yours sincerely,
HMRC Freedom of Information Team
================================================================================
MESSAGE 4 [outgoing]
HEADER: Mr. Christopher Robinson
17 March 2022
Delivered
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear HM Revenue and Customs,
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.
I am writing to request an internal review of HM Revenue and Customs's handling of my FOI request 'Tiger`s Roar `Loan Busting`.'.
`A request which would not normally be regarded as vexatious in isolation may assume that
quality once considered in context. An example of this would be where an individual is
placing a significant strain on an authority’s resources by submitting a long and frequent
series of requests, and the most recent request, although not obviously vexatious in itself, is
contributing to that aggregated burden'.
The `aggregated burden' that your organisation is suffering is as nought to the strain that this draconian policy that you are peddling is causing 50 thousand members of the public. I believe that we have a right to know that what your organisation is telling the HoC & HoL is in fact the truth. So I therefore ask again, `Following on from FOI2021-24757, Contained within the text of the Newsletter `The Tiger`s Roar' under `Loan Busting' you state that you are currently working with the promoters/ enablers of them [Loan Schemes]. Could you please confirm or deny if this was actually the case and if any correspondence/ Metadata was produced?'
A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/t...
Yours faithfully,
Mr. Christopher Robinson
================================================================================
MESSAGE 5 [incoming]
HEADER: Team, FOI,
HM Revenue and Customs
17 March 2022
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our ref: IR2022/12116
Dear Mr Robinson,
Freedom of Information Act 2000 Acknowledgement
Thank you for your communication of 17 March.
We have allocated the above reference which you should quote if you need
to contact us.
We will arrange for a reply to be sent to you which will either comply
with our obligations under Freedom of Information Act or, if we think it's
an enquiry that we don't need to address under the terms of the Act, let
you know why. If it is the latter we will, if possible, pass it on to a
more appropriate part of the Department for answer.
While we aim to respond t o all freedom of information requests within 20
working days, if for some reason this timescale cannot be complied with,
we will, where possible, write to you explaining the reason for the delay
and provide an estimated time for response.
Yours sincerely
HMRC Freedom of Information Team
================================================================================
MESSAGE 6 [incoming]
HEADER: Team, FOI,
HM Revenue and Customs
14 April 2022
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Attachment
IR blank template IR2022 12116 JM.AW cleared.fin v2.pdf
175K
View
Download
Dear Mr Robinson
We are writing in response to your request for information, received on 17
March 2022.
Yours sincerely,
HMRC Freedom of Information Team
================================================================================
ATTACHMENT TEXT EXTRACTION / OCR
================================================================================
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATTACHMENT: FOI2022_06559.pdf
TEXT_FILE: FOI2022_06559.pdf.txt
METHOD: pdf_native
OCR_USED: False
PAGES: 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- PDF page 1 ---
If you need extra support, for example if you have a disability, a mental health condition, or
do not speak English/Welsh, go to www.gov.uk and search for ‘get help from HMRC’.
Text Relay service prefix number – 18001
OFFICIAL
Freedom of Information Team
S1715
6 Floor
Central Mail Unit
Newcastle Upon Tyne
NE98 1ZZ
Mr Christopher Robinson
By email: request-835393-
3bef1e23@whatdotheyknow.com
Email
foi.request@hmrc.gov.uk
Web
www.gov.uk
Date: 28 February 2022
Our ref:
FOI2022/06559
Dear Mr Robinson
Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA)
Thank you for your request, which was received on 22 February, for the following
information:
“Following on from FOI2021-24757, Contained within the text of the Newsletter `The Tiger`s
Roar' under `Loan Busting' you state that you are currently working with the promoters/
enablers of them [Loan Schemes]. Could you please confirm or deny if this was actually the
case and if any correspondence/ Metadata was produced?”
The emphasis on protecting public authorities’ resources from unreasonable requests was
acknowledged by the Upper Tribunal in the case of Information Commissioner vs Devon
County Council & Dransfield [2012] UKUT 440 (AAC), (28 January 2013) when it defined the
purpose of section 14 as follows;
‘Section 14…is concerned with the nature of the request and has the effect of disapplying
the citizen’s right under Section 1(1)…The purpose of Section 14…must be to protect the
resources (in the broadest sense of that word) of the public authority from being squandered
on disproportionate use of FOIA…’ (paragraph 10).
A request which would not normally be regarded as vexatious in isolation may assume that
quality once considered in context. An example of this would be where an individual is
placing a significant strain on an authority’s resources by submitting a long and frequent
series of requests, and the most recent request, although not obviously vexatious in itself, is
contributing to that aggregated burden.
In Information Commissioner vs Devon County Council & Dransfield [2012] UKUT 440
(AAC), (28 January 2013), Judge Wikeley recognised that the Upper Tribunal in Wise v The
Information Commissioner (GIA/1871/2011) had identified proportionality as the common
theme underpinning section 14(1) and he made particular reference to its comment that:
‘Inherent in the policy behind section 14(1) is the idea of proportionality. There must be an
appropriate relationship between such matters as the information sought, the purpose of the
request, and the time and other resources that would be needed to provide it.’
HMRC has received 20 information requests from you, concerning various aspects of the
Loan Charge in the past 2 months. Three of your requests seek copies of the same
--- PDF page 2 ---
2
OFFICIAL
information, in many cases your requests are so broad that they clearly would exceed the
FOIA cost limit.
HMRC has previously advised that your requests do not seek specific information and you
have been directed to ICO guidance on making effective information requests.
Having considered all factors associated with your series of requests, I do not find their
serious purpose to outweigh the aggregated impact on the department.
If you are not satisfied with our reply, you may request a review within 40 working days of
receiving this letter by emailing foi.review@hmrc.gov.uk or by writing to our address at the
top.
If you are not content with the outcome of an internal review you can complain to the
Information Commissioner’s Office.
Yours sincerely,
HM Revenue and Customs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATTACHMENT: IR_blank_template_IR2022_12116_JM.AW_cleared.fin_v2.pdf
TEXT_FILE: IR_blank_template_IR2022_12116_JM.AW_cleared.fin_v2.pdf.txt
METHOD: pdf_native
OCR_USED: False
PAGES: 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- PDF page 1 ---
If you need extra support, for example if you have a disability, a mental health condition, or
do not speak English/Welsh, go to www.gov.uk and search for ‘get help from HMRC’.
Text Relay service prefix number – 18001
OFFICIAL
Freedom of Information Team
S1715
6 Floor
Central Mail Unit
Newcastle Upon Tyne
NE98 1ZZ
Mr Christopher Robinson
By email: request-835393-
3bef1e23@whatdotheyknow.com
Email
foi.request@hmrc.gov.uk
Web
www.gov.uk
Date: 14 April 2022
Our ref:
IR2022/12116
Dear Mr Robinson
Thank you for your email of 17 March, which seeks a review of our original response to your
information request.
Original request
On 22 February, you asked for the following:
“Following on from FOI2021-24757, Contained within the text of the Newsletter `The Tiger`s
Roar' under `Loan Busting' you state that you are currently working with the promoters/
enablers of them [Loan Schemes]. Could you please confirm or deny if this was actually the
case and if any correspondence/ Metadata was produced?”
Our response
We replied on 28 February, saying:
The emphasis on protecting public authorities’ resources from unreasonable requests was
acknowledged by the Upper Tribunal in the case of Information Commissioner vs Devon
County Council & Dransfield [2012] UKUT 440 (AAC), (28 January 2013) when it defined the
purpose of section 14 as follows;
‘Section 14…is concerned with the nature of the request and has the effect of disapplying
the citizen’s right under Section 1(1)…The purpose of Section 14…must be to protect the
resources (in the broadest sense of that word) of the public authority from being squandered
on disproportionate use of FOIA…’ (paragraph 10).
A request which would not normally be regarded as vexatious in isolation may assume that
quality once considered in context. An example of this would be where an individual is
placing a significant strain on an authority’s resources by submitting a long and frequent
series of requests, and the most recent request, although not obviously vexatious in itself, is
contributing to that aggregated burden.
In Information Commissioner vs Devon County Council & Dransfield [2012] UKUT 440
(AAC), (28 January 2013), Judge Wikeley recognised that the Upper Tribunal in Wise v The
Information Commissioner (GIA/1871/2011) had identified proportionality as the common
theme underpinning section 14(1) and he made particular reference to its comment that:
‘Inherent in the policy behind section 14(1) is the idea of proportionality. There must be an
appropriate relationship between such matters as the information sought, the purpose of the
--- PDF page 2 ---
2
OFFICIAL
request, and the time and other resources that would be needed to provide it.’
HMRC has received 20 information requests from you, concerning various aspects of the
Loan Charge in the past 2 months. Three of your requests seek copies of the same
information, in many cases your requests are so broad that they clearly would exceed the
FOIA cost limit.
HMRC has previously advised that your requests do not seek specific information and you
have been directed to ICO guidance on making effective information requests.
Having considered all factors associated with your series of requests, I do not find their
serious purpose to outweigh the aggregated impact on the department.
Internal review request
On 17 March you asked us to review our handling of your request:
“I am writing to request an internal review of HM Revenue and Customs's handling of my
FOI request 'Tiger`s Roar `Loan Busting`.'.
`A request which would not normally be regarded as vexatious in isolation may assume that
quality once considered in context. An example of this would be where an individual is
placing a significant strain on an authority’s resources by submitting a long and frequent
series of requests, and the most recent request, although not obviously vexatious in itself, is
contributing to that aggregated burden'.
The `aggregated burden' that your organisation is suffering is as nought to the strain that this
draconian policy that you are peddling is causing 50 thousand members of the public. I
believe that we have a right to know that what your organisation is telling the HoC & HoL is
in fact the truth. So I therefore ask again, `Following on from FOI2021-24757, Contained
within the text of the Newsletter `The Tiger`s Roar' under `Loan Busting' you state that you
are currently working with the promoters/ enablers of them [Loan Schemes]. Could you
please confirm or deny if this was actually the case and if any correspondence/ Metadata
was produced?'”
Internal review
The purpose of this review is to assess how your request was handled and to determine
whether the original decision given to you was correct.
We received your request on 22 February and replied by email on 28 February. This was
within the statutory deadline in compliance with section 10(1) of the FOIA.
The response also set out our review procedure and your right to complain to the
Information Commissioner, as required by section 17(7) of the FOIA.
Considerations
The response to your original request determined that it was vexatious within the meaning of
s.14(1) of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). This means a public authority is not obligated
to comply with a request for information if that request is vexatious.
ICO guidance, ‘Dealing with vexatious requests (section 14)’, provides that whilst the FOIA is
generally considered to be applicant blind, this does not mean that an authority cannot take
into account the wider context in which the request is made. The guidance confirms that the
factors to consider include but are not limited to:
•
the duration of requests;
•
the number of requests being made;
•
the pattern of those requests, and
•
the motive behind them.
--- PDF page 3 ---
3
OFFICIAL
This was explained to you in the original response, which stated that:
“A request which would not normally be regarded as vexatious in isolation may assume that
quality once considered in context. An example of this would be where an individual is
placing a significant strain on an authority’s resources by submitting a long and frequent
series of requests…”
It was also explained in our original response, that you had made around 20 information
requests, relating to different aspects of the Loan Charge, around two months prior to your
FOI of 22 February. Some of these were requests for the same information and others were
broad and would have likely exceeded the FOIA cost limit.
Whilst fishing for information is not, in itself, enough to make a request vexatious, the ICO
provides that some requests may:
•
impose a burden by obliging the authority to sift through a substantial volume of
information to isolate and extract the relevant details.
•
encompass information which is only of limited value because of the wide scope of the
request.
•
create a burden by requiring the authority to spend a considerable amount of time
considering any exemptions and redactions.
•
be part of a pattern of persistent fishing expeditions by the same requester.
Based on the number of FOI requests you submitted in the two months prior to your FOI of 22
February, and the number of FOIs you have submitted since then, it is reasonable to expect
that this pattern of submitting frequent and numerous FOI will continue. This pattern also
suggests that you would not be satisfied with any response, and you would therefore continue
to submit numerous follow up enquiries, regardless of the information supplied.
I have, therefore, carefully considered your request of 22 February and the context
surrounding it, and I have decided that the original response, determining that the request of
22 February was within the meaning of s.14(1) of FOIA, was correct.
Appeal process
If you are not content with the outcome of this internal review you can complain to the
Information Commissioner’s Office.
Yours sincerely,
HM Revenue and Customs