Start here

The case in one paragraph

A council in England handles requests for information from a shared mailbox and a spreadsheet. Two laws apply to the same inbox. The Freedom of Information Act 2000 covers most information. The Environmental Information Regulations 2004 cover anything about the environment, which at a council means planning, waste, noise and much else. The two regimes count the same 20 working days. They differ on nearly everything around them: who may ask, how, what can be refused, what can be charged, and how the applicant can challenge the answer. The work in these files is the analysis for one process and one request log that serve both regimes. It runs from the brief to a change request, raised once the regulator's new name had a date: 30 September 2026. The council, its starting point and most of its roles are my choices, tagged MINE. Every rule is tagged LAW, GUIDE or, where it is a local choice, MINE with the decision that made it. Each is traced to the clause, the page or the decision it came from.

Why English law?

Because every source behind the rules is published. The Acts and regulations are on legislation.gov.uk, the Code of Practice is on GOV.UK, and the regulator's guidance is on the regulator's own website. So every rule taken from them can be checked, by you or by anyone who reviews your work. The rules I chose are marked as choices and point to the decision that made them. The blanks carry no case content: they fit any process that runs on published rules.

Why these documents

• No use-case specifications. The user stories carry the behaviour, and the state model carries the clock. A third description of the same flow would be the one that drifts.
• No business case with money in it. A council handles requests because the law says so, not because it pays for itself. Any cost or benefit figure would be invented.
• No interview notes, workshop minutes or recordings. No interview took place. The starting point of the fictional council is my choice and is tagged MINE.

Your first hour

Follow one request through the whole chain before you read anything else. EX-07 is three requests on one template, costed together and refused on cost.

1. 03, the brief: read the problem statement, then the row for EX-07 in the specimen requests.
2. 09, the rules: read BR-33, BR-35 and BR-36: what counts towards the estimate, when requests are costed together, and how far a refusal on cost reaches. Then read BR-16, the duty to advise and assist, which DT-03 applies to every refusal on cost.
3. 10, the decision tables: follow EX-07 through DT-03 to rule R6.
4. 12, the stories: read US-08, the same case as dated scenarios.
5. 18, the tests: read TC-19, its steps and its expected result.
6. 19, the matrix: filter on REQ-19 and see the rules, the story and the test on one row.

Then read the set in order.

Three ways to use the files

Read the filled set in order

Read the documents in number order, from 03 to 21. For each document, read the reviewer's questions on its first page before the document itself, then check that the document answers them. In a filled file each question ends with the place that answers it.

Use a blank at work

In a Word file, delete the "About this document" page. In an Excel file, delete the "About this document" section of the "How to use" sheet and keep the rest. Keep the columns: they are there because a reviewer will ask for them. In a blank file, text in square brackets is an instruction. Replace it with your own text. The blanks name no law and no organisation, so they fit your own process. Replace the header and footer with your own. They name these files and the date I read the law, and neither belongs in your document.

Build a case of your own

1. Choose a process governed by rules that someone has published.
2. Write the source register first: one row per document, with the date you last checked it.
3. Copy the structure, never the content.
4. Tag every statement: LAW, GUIDE, MINE or OPEN.
5. Ask a colleague to put the reviewer's questions to you, and answer each one with a place in your files.
6. Do not present the filled examples as your own. Present the case you built in steps 1 to 5 instead.

The order of the work

The documents fall into three groups:

• Frame, 03 to 08: the brief, the roles, the sources, the process, the clock and the words.
• Specify, 09 to 13: the rules, the decision tables, the requirements, the stories and the quality needs.
• Assemble and check, 14 to 21: decisions and questions, risks, the RACI, the BRD, the tests, the matrix, the change request and the review exercise.

Keep document 14 open from day one: decisions and open questions start before any document is finished.

The IDs in one table

Every item has an ID with a two-figure number. It is defined once, in one document, and used everywhere else by that ID. 02-INDEX.pdf shows where each one appears.

The tags

Tags can be combined, for example LAW and GUIDE together. The reference comes after the tags: the section of the law, the paragraph of the guidance, or the decision behind a choice. GUIDE is new in these files. On analify.com I use four more tags, explained at analify.com/method: POLICY, HELP, THREADS and WALKTHROUGH. None is needed here, because the organisation is fictional. It has no published policy or help pages, no public complaint threads to count and no published journey to walk through.

The review exercise

Do it after you have read the filled set, or before you review someone else's work. The flawed file holds twelve requirements with ten planted faults, each of a different type, and two requirements with none. The key is a separate file, so you can finish your own review before you see an answer. Every reviewer's question from every document is collected in 02-INDEX.pdf, so you can ask them of a colleague, or have them asked of you.

How to present a case in five minutes

Four steps, one short paragraph each. The last page of 03 is a one-pager in this shape: filled in on this case, and blank for yours.

1. Challenge: the problem in two sentences, as a fact about today.
2. Approach: what you did, in the order you did it.
3. Decisions: three choices, each with the alternative you rejected.
4. Evidence: where a reviewer can check each claim.

What these files are not

• Not legal advice. They show analysis on rules you can check, as they were read on 29 September 2026.
• Not a course, and not preparation for any certification.
• Not a library of templates. They are 19 documents that fit together.
• Not a real council's documents. The council is fictional and unnamed. The law, the guidance and the calendar are real, and each is cited.
• Not about Scotland. Scotland has its own law and its own regulator.
• Not updated and not supported. They are a snapshot, and the date is printed in every document.
• No AI prompts. No interview transcripts or meeting notes either: no interview or meeting took place, and none is invented.