Information Request and Hostile Refusal From Onside Advocacy

A couple of years ago, in 2017, I submitted a request for data to after they blocked my email address. 

I discovered staff had discussed in communications, how I should be ‘handled’ in future, implying I would be discriminated against when contacting the organisation, which has occurred, and after I had challenged the negligence of their provided advocates.

‘discuss how we deal with Chris contacting us in future’

The prejudice became more evident when I received a hostile email response from RT (Data Controller) of onside advocacy on 3rd October 2019 in response to my request for my data on 8th September 2019. The email chain can be viewed in a redacted format below with concerning parts highlighted.

Response to my subject access request

Gmail - SAR (onside 2019) Redacted_highlighted

I have published this in the interest of the public. Particularly those who are forced to deal with this organisation and might be concerned such response is a standard reply to anyone making a second or further request for personal data. Notably, as the data controller stated in the final communication ‘I wanted to make sure I was clear and used wording taken directly from legislation and the ICO website’.

You may notice the aggressive and unprofessional response, absolute rejection and immediate closure of my request conflicts with ICO guidance. 

They did not inform me of or about:

  • How they must consider a request in the context in which it is made and are responsible for demonstrating that it is manifestly unfounded.
  • My right to make a complaint to the ICO or another supervisory authority.
  • My ability to seek to enforce this right through a judicial remedy.

I believe the hostile and unprofessional response I received, if sent to some individuals with similar requests, could be a cause of distress, notably when having no choice but to deal with their organisation.

The information I have requested is essential to the book I am composing, for continuity of fact, and the eventual legal redress I wish to seek for my sibling and I.

As proof that onside have processed further data, below is a screenshot of my message to them on 13th March 2018, which was acknowledged yet received no response other than the whileincare Facebook profile being blocked.



The Priory: Teenage Mental Health Uncovered

I believe, everyone should watch this documentary, which aired on 18th April 2019, regarding The Priory Group:

The Priory: Teenage Mental Health Uncovered

You can see CCTV is used and operational in the Priory placement, yet to my knowledge, none of the incidents and likely others was reported.
In my opinion, this can only strengthen the case for CCTV in places where vulnerable adults live, and for it to be controlled and monitored independently.

For the interest of the public, I have a particular letter from DW (Director of Risk and Safety at The Priory Group) defending staff who accidentally filmed themselves, and later deleted the recording.
In the deleted and recovered recording, Priory Group staff admit to ‘more’ evidence being given to local authority social workers, yet I discovered it was wilfully ignored by them and concealed.

I hope to publish the letter in the coming weeks, along with the video recording of staff in the interest of the public, particularly those who have loved ones in Priory Group ‘care’.


Time between last family home visits

The timer below displays the number of days between the date my brother was allowed home to visit his mother and me, and today, without interference by Herefordshire Council or The Priory Group. Both organisations ignoring requests and forcing us to only have contact or home visits when convenient for them, denying him and us of private and family life for this period.

Since my brother was placed in the residential home, out of county and against his family’s wishes, his needs have been neglected and he has not been provided with adequate care and support nor communication aids or a reliable phone service and necessary equipment. The Priory Group and Herefordshire Council ignoring, not least, The Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970, since December 2013.

The severe restriction imposed on my brother had denied him access to a mobile phone I loaned to him for contact with us, and computer equipment, since November 2017 when it was confiscated from him by a carer at H House. Seeing some video recordings, including recovered deleted video confirmed my concerns.


Before this time my brother was not allowed home to visit his mother for some 54 days 2 hours, this due to Herefordshire Council refusing to allow us to meet at a chosen location or provide alternative support to him and our mother and I. Prior to this the longest periods were 64 days, 58 days and 23.5 hours, due to The Priory Group and H House wilfully ignoring a total of 18 of 24 requests.