PUBLIC SERVICES AND HEALTH POLICY PANEL – 8 FEBRUARY 2007
PART I - NOT DELEGATED
6.CEMETERY CHARGES
(DLE)
1.Summary
1.1To provide members with more information regarding charging members of the public for carrying out cemetery searches.
2.Details
2.1Executive at a meeting on 8 January 2007 considered the recommendation from PSHPP that members of the public be charged £50 for family record searches within the Council’s two graveyards. Executive members were concerned that the fee was too high and that there may be issues under the Freedom of Information Act (FOI) 2005. They therefore asked that the matter be reconsidered by PSHPP (minute EX118/06 refers).
2.2The original report to PSHPP on 2 November 2006 explained that as the number of people researching their family history increases, the amount of officer time dedicated to searching through records has also increased. Although records for Woodcock Hill are relatively easy to look up, those appertaining to Chorleywood Road cemetery can take considerable time, as the records are not in a structured format and some date back to the early 1800s and are very fragile. A request for information on one family member, can often lead to further requests and it can take the officer concerned several hours, spread over several days to look the information up. Many other local authorities therefore charge for this service, hence the suggestion that Three Rivers invoked a £50 nominal fee for such searches (unless a straightforward Woodcock Hill one).
2.3Officers have investigated whether or not the request to check family records is covered by FOI. An FOI request is a request for recorded information, which would cover this. The Council cannot charge for FOI requests. However, if answering a request is going to take up more than 18 hours worth of work, (being £450 at £25 p/h) the Council is entitled to refuse to answer. As it is unlikely that any request will take this long, the Council will be obliged to respond to them without charging.
2.4A suggestion has been made that members of the public could make an appointment to look through the records themselves. Howvere, as the cemetery books also contain records of grave owners, many who are still alive, this option could not be pursued, as this information would be subject to Data Protection restrictions. In addition, the Council has a statutory duty to retain cemetery records; should any of the older fragile records become damaged and unreadable, by a member of the public looking through them, the Council would be failing in its statutory duty.
2.5The Council has a statutory duty to retain all cemetery records
3.Options/Reasons for Recommendation
3.1The Council cannot legally charge for requests for details on where members of their family are buried.
4.Policy/Budget Implications
4.1The recommendations to this report are within Council policy and contained within existing budgets.
- Financial Implications
5.1The effect on existing budgets of not charging for searches would be marginal.
6.Legal, Staffing, Community Safety, Customer Service, Equal Opportunity, Environmental & Website Implications
6.1None specific.
7.Risk Management Implications
7.1The Council has agreed its risk management strategy which can be found on the website at http// The risk management implications of this report are detailed below.
7.2The subject of this report is covered by the Environmental Protection service plan. Any risks resulting from this report will be included in the risk register and, if necessary, managed within this plan.
7.3The following table gives the risks if the recommendation(s) are agreed, together with a scored assessment of their impact and likelihood:
Description of Risk / Impact / Likelihood88 / Insufficient staff resources to meet requests / II / E
7.4The following table gives the risks that would exist if the recommendation is rejected, together with a scored assessment of their impact and likelihood:
Description of Risk / Impact / Likelihood89 / Council is challenged under FOI / II / D
7.5Of the risks detailed above numbers none are already managed within the Environmental Protection service plan.
7.6The above risks are plotted on the matrix below depending on the scored assessments of impact and likelihood, detailed definitions of which are included in the risk management strategy. The Council has determined its aversion to risk and is prepared to tolerate risks where the combination of impact and likelihood are plotted in the shaded area of the matrix. The remaining risks require a treatment plan.
Likelihood / A / Impact / LikelihoodB / V = Catastrophic / A = >98%
C / IV = Critical / B = 75% - 98%
D / 89 / III = Significant / C = 50% - 75%
E / 88 / II = Marginal / D = 25% - 50%
F / I = Negligible / E = 2% - 25%
I / II / III / IV / V / F = <2%
Impact
7.7In the officers’ opinion none of the new risks above, were they to come about, would seriously prejudice the achievement of the Strategic Plan, and are therefore operational risks. The effectiveness of treatment plans are reviewed by the Audit Committee annually
8.Recommendation
That PSHPP recommend to Executive that no charge is invoked to cover officer time searching through cemetery records.
Report prepared by:Alison Page, Environmental Protection Manager
Background Papers
Freedom of Information Act 2005
c:\documents and settings\beetoa\local settings\temporary internet files\olk2\cemetery archives.doc