My challenge to the Police Information Notice, or 'harassment warning', (see The police visit Caebrwyn, and Challenging the harassment warning) and my complaints about the police investigation itself, are now logged with the Professional Standards department of Dyfed Powys Police, as below;
The logged complaint above does not reflect the point I made in my letter in that the course of conduct complained of by Mr James does not constitute harassment. Nor does it reflect my request for the PIN to be revoked and removed from the Police National Computer.
Therefore I will be corresponding further with the police, and I will take it all the way if necessary.
By way of an update to the decision by Mark James and the Council to pursue me for £190,390 in legal costs, the matter has now been transferred to Carmarthen County Court.
An Interim Charging Order was placed on my home earlier this year. Naturally, I objected to this charge being made Final and a judge in Manchester (where these things are now dealt with), has transferred this final decision to Carmarthen. I will find out within the next couple of weeks (after another decision by another judge) whether I will be allowed a court hearing.
I certainly hope so, as I have much to say...
With regards to Mr James' damages, (for which he also has a Charging Order) arising from his illegally funded counterclaim, I'm still waiting to see if he's accepted my offer of £1 a week, made at Carmarthen County Court at the end of July.
Seems to be taking a while...
1. Lack of fairness and impartiality;
Mrs Thompson is making a complaint in relation to a police investigation involving the Chief Executive of Carmarthenshire County Council. The Complainant states that she writes a blog which is critical of Carmarthenshire County Council and its decision makers as she believes these decisions benefit from further public scrutiny.
This has resulted in the Complainant receiving a Police Information Notice (PIN).
Mrs Thompson is unhappy at receiving the PIN and feels that this action has been taken by Dyfed Powys Police in order to prevent her from legitimately scrutinising the decisions and actions of the Chief Executive of Carmarthenshire County Council.
2. Lack of fairness and impartiality;
Mrs Thompson feels the investigation should have been transferred to another force due to a conflict of interest. To support this Mrs Thompson refers to a historical investigation against the Chief Executive, which was referred to Gloucestershire Constabulary due to the close working relationship between Dyfed Powys Police and Carmarthenshire County Council.
3. Other neglect or failure in duty;
Mrs Thompson is unhappy with the length of time taken to investigate. She feels the complaints made against her by the Chief Executive failed to meet the evidential test for criminal proceedings, and this should have been identified by the police earlier.
The logged complaint above does not reflect the point I made in my letter in that the course of conduct complained of by Mr James does not constitute harassment. Nor does it reflect my request for the PIN to be revoked and removed from the Police National Computer.
Therefore I will be corresponding further with the police, and I will take it all the way if necessary.
* * *
By way of an update to the decision by Mark James and the Council to pursue me for £190,390 in legal costs, the matter has now been transferred to Carmarthen County Court.
An Interim Charging Order was placed on my home earlier this year. Naturally, I objected to this charge being made Final and a judge in Manchester (where these things are now dealt with), has transferred this final decision to Carmarthen. I will find out within the next couple of weeks (after another decision by another judge) whether I will be allowed a court hearing.
I certainly hope so, as I have much to say...
With regards to Mr James' damages, (for which he also has a Charging Order) arising from his illegally funded counterclaim, I'm still waiting to see if he's accepted my offer of £1 a week, made at Carmarthen County Court at the end of July.
Seems to be taking a while...
3 comments:
Apart from the obvious unfairness of the whole fiasco, what I fail to understand is why an exorbitant (in this day and age) interest rate (8%?) is being charged on the amount you allegedly owe James. Most people find it difficult to get more than 1% interest on their investments these days and even mortgage interest rates are not that high. Why is he allowed to charge such an eye-watering rate of interest; who sets the rate?
Anon 17:31
This is the rate set by the court which, as I understand it, is standard. Unless there's a special rate for chief executives...
If his claim was illegally funded why then do you have to pay? What part of it was illegal?
Surely, if his claim was illegally funded there would be a case to answer? In which case why are you offering to even pay a penny towards him? How and why was his case illegally funded?
Sounds like you need a wider audience. Would HTV Wales, S4C be interested, after the scandal from parry-jones in west wales Carmarthens man would be a good opportunity for them to highlight another weasel in power.
Post a Comment