FOI Request - Review of 101003809444 Short-Term Let (STL) Licensing Costs and Income

Request 101003821656

Review of 101003809444 Short-Term Let (STL) Licensing Costs and Income

I am writing to request an internal review of Moray Council’s handling of my Freedom of Information request (Ref: 101003809444) regarding the costs, income, and governance arrangements surrounding the Short-Term Let (STL) licensing scheme.

The response provided fails to satisfy the requirements of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 for the following reasons:

1. Improper Use of Section 17 – “Information Not Held”
It is not credible that Moray Council holds no records, estimates, or internal breakdowns of the costs associated with the STL scheme—particularly given that:

The STL licensing scheme is now approaching its third full year of operation;

The Scottish Government's statutory framework (Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 as amended) requires that STL licensing be cost-neutral;

Public authorities must be able to demonstrate that fees are proportionate and based on actual costs.

To claim that the Council holds no relevant breakdowns or internal estimates undermines basic expectations of statutory compliance, public audit, and accountability. If no records exist, that itself is a matter of serious concern and potential non-compliance with Scottish Government guidance.

I therefore request clarification of what steps have been taken to estimate STL operating costs, how these estimates informed fee setting, and whether any planning, budget tracking, or internal reports were generated—formally or informally.

2. Failure to Provide Meaningful Income Data Your response refers to the published licence register and suggests the public can multiply fees by volume. This is not an adequate substitute for directly disclosing the total income received and the number of withdrawals, rejections, or refunds, as originally requested.

Aggregate income and licensing outcomes are routinely held by all Scottish licensing authorities and should be disclosed directly in response to FOI.

3. Cost Recovery Assessment – Statutory Oversight You confirmed that the Council has not conducted any cost recovery assessment. This raises concerns about the legality of Moray’s STL fee structure and the Council’s ability to demonstrate compliance with the cost-neutrality requirement in the enabling legislation. It is unclear how the Council can justify or defend its STL fee levels without such assessment.

I therefore request the internal review to consider this failure to hold records as a failure of statutory responsibility, which cannot be excused under FOISA Section 17.

4. Public Interest and Accountability
Given the national scale of STL licensing, the known financial pressures on councils, and the legal duty to ensure cost recovery—not profit—transparency in this area is a matter of significant public interest. Members of the public, including STL operators, have a right to understand how fees are set and how public money is used.

The refusal to provide even basic costing information risks undermining public confidence in the licensing regime and opens the Council to criticism regarding governance, financial transparency, and regulatory compliance.

I respectfully request that this internal review fully reassesses the Council’s response and provides:

A clear explanation of what STL cost-related records are held;

Total STL licence income to date;

Any informal or working-level calculations, emails, or budget models related to STL fee setting or delivery costs;

A reassessment of whether the response meets the public interest test.

Please treat this as a formal request for review under FOISA. I look forward to your response within 20 working days.