An update, 2nd December;
I was in court today to resist the council's charging order for £190,390, on our home, being made final. The judge decided to make it final, as it had been an issue with a higher court, but did so "with reluctance". It was patently clear that I would never be able to pay it, even if the council took the next step and forced sale. He gave something of a warning, in so many words, to the council, that if they did spend even more taxpayers' money by trying to force sale, with nil return, the Wales Audit Office might have something to say about it.
Anyway that was that. Whether they force sale tomorrow or in ten years time is immaterial as the chief executive is already trying to do exactly that. Papers are currently being exchanged and a hearing will be listed in due course.
I would like to thank everyone who has supported me both online and off, and those who have taken the trouble to write letters questioning the council's actions. Given her position as a county councillor, I am particularly grateful to Sian Caiach for her support.
A small but determined protest was held at County Hall today, and an attempt was made to deliver a pound of flesh, a reference to Shylock's desire for revenge, to Mr James. It seems he declined to accept it. The Llanelli Herald has the details.
I said a few words to the Llanelli Herald and BBC Wales before and after the hearing, including this statement;
"This was a pointless, wasteful and vindictive exercise against a critic of the council and has nothing to do with any 'obligation to the taxpayer', if it was, then the council wouldn't have funded the chief executive, unlawfully, in the way they did, this is about destruction. The charge is more than our home is worth and will never be realised. I will continue to fight, and continue to blog, and the next step will be to try and stop the chief executive's attempt to force sale of our home. Another deeply vindictive and unnecessary action.
As ever, I would like to thank everyone who has supported me and all those who have sent messages of goodwill."
3rd December; For Cneifiwr's take on recent events see 'Pecking Order', an excellent analysis, as ever.
First of all I must apologise for the lack of 'normal' blogging. Caebrwyn always keeps a watching brief but, to be honest, the recent actions of the chief executive and the council have been a bit of a distraction. And not just recently, the whole year has been a bit difficult. Having said that, it will be business as usual in due course. I hope.
The actions of 'the council' to place the Final Charging Order on my home for £190,390 court costs will be heard next week (Friday 2nd December, in Carmarthen). The chief executive's plan, to force sale of our home, is currently making its way through the court process, and, with no sign of abating, a date will be set for that hearing before long.
The two actions are not separate, the lines between public and private are blurred and the motives for both are unique. This is not about financial ruin as they know I have no finances to ruin other than the family home, it's about destruction.
As I've said before, I stand by everything I've written over the past seven years. In my view I have scrutinised the local council and those that make decisions, nothing more and nothing less. I have been motivated by trying to open up an organisation which has acted like a Victorian gentlemens' club for the past 100 years, not by "revenge" or "malice".
This whole episode started by my attempt to film a meeting, this made a small but positive impact, leading to webcasts, greater public scrutiny, greater public engagement, interest and understanding of local democracy. If it led to one less thing being swept under the carpet then it's been a good thing. Incidentally, a reference I made to 'lumpy carpets' in relation to the decision to keep the investigation into the Pembrey Country Park scandal in-house, formed part of the chief executive's weird and wonderful list of 'criminal' complaints to the police earlier this year.
The ins and outs, and legal (or illegal) points of all this have been covered by this blog, and, more eloquently, by others. There will be more to come.
However, I'd like to make a few comments.
Firstly the £190k defence costs, the subject of next week's hearing. The decision to pursue me was made, in March this year, by the Plaid Cymru led Executive Board, along with input from Gravell, Palmer etc, and with the guiding hand (possibly literally) of the chief executive no doubt. Details from the exempt report, along with the Executive Board decision were leaked to the press and the Herald commented on the whole business, as I did, here.
This is being done on the pretext of an obligation to the taxpayers. Let me assure you it is not. There was not one iota of concern when the chief executive was illegally bankrolled for his counterclaim, there was a possible risk of £100k for that alone, with no knowledge of whether I could meet those costs or damages if I lost and the damages were never covered by insurance anyway. Cllr Sian Caiach has recently mentioned the then secret report which went to the executive board in 2012 recommending the indemnity. You may recall it was approved, and added to, by Mr James himself prior to the meeting, the meeting in which he remained...
And let's not forget the second Public Interest report from the Wales Audit Office which declared the chief executive's pension arrangements equally unlawful. As for the strange decision to pay off a third party loan for a private company, Scarlets Regional Ltd, obligations to the taxpayer couldn't have been further from anyone's mind. My comments regarding this payment also featured in Mr James' police complaint.
One (unintended I'm sure) consequence of Mr James' attempt to involve the police was that the police found no evidential basis to pursue the "criminal" findings in Tugendhat's civil judgement which had formed the basis of Mr James' belated complaint.
As I have said, the serious findings in Tugendhat's judgement in 2013 led to my insurance being revoked, the police looked at the same evidence as the judge and saw, and found, that I had no case to answer. The episode revealed a lot about the mindset of Mr James as well as reinforcing the fact that the judgement was a horrendous miscarriage of justice. Will the courts take any notice of the police outcome in respect of the £190k court order? I don't expect so, neither will it take into account, I don't suppose, that the enforcement action is malicious and punitive.
Plaid Cymru supposedly 'inherited' the situation created by the previous administration of Independents Meryl and Pam and Labour's Kevin Madge, and at one time, in opposition Plaid were all guns blazing. And if you think that the chief executive had no hand in putting them 'in power' then, in my opinion, think again. What better way to silence opposition than to offer the Reverend Dole thirty pieces of silver, or in this case, £48k per year as leader of the council, still with Meryl and Pam in tow of course, In return, Dole has played the chief executive's game and enjoyed the trappings of power, trips to the hospitality box of the Liberty Stadium are not for the likes of lowly opposition councillors.
Cllr Dole has denied that the payments were unlawful, even challenging the qualifications of the appointed auditor (on behalf of Mr James) and has continued to authorised further use of public money in solicitors costs and court fees to pursue me for something I don't have.
Which brings me on to the chief executive. He has certainly kept to his promise to "vigorously pursue the payment of damages due to me, by all legal means" (my underline). Earlier this year he made a less than accurate statement to the press that I had made no offers regarding his damages when in fact he knew I had.The issue of whether he's going to give it back to the council, or 'good causes, or immortalise himself as a gold plated statue in Notts Square is all a moot point for me at the moment, and him. He hasn't had it yet.
I understand that Mark James CBE is a religious man, I am not religious and cannot imagine myself ever threatening to make a family homeless.
Perhaps Mr James should re-familiarise himself with Matthew 16:26 "For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, but loses his soul?"
Whilst the Reverend Dole is preaching the Christmas message at his local chapel, and Mr James CBE says Grace before carving his Christmas turkey, I hope they consider the importance of family, and most of all the importance of the family home.
I was in court today to resist the council's charging order for £190,390, on our home, being made final. The judge decided to make it final, as it had been an issue with a higher court, but did so "with reluctance". It was patently clear that I would never be able to pay it, even if the council took the next step and forced sale. He gave something of a warning, in so many words, to the council, that if they did spend even more taxpayers' money by trying to force sale, with nil return, the Wales Audit Office might have something to say about it.
Anyway that was that. Whether they force sale tomorrow or in ten years time is immaterial as the chief executive is already trying to do exactly that. Papers are currently being exchanged and a hearing will be listed in due course.
I would like to thank everyone who has supported me both online and off, and those who have taken the trouble to write letters questioning the council's actions. Given her position as a county councillor, I am particularly grateful to Sian Caiach for her support.
A small but determined protest was held at County Hall today, and an attempt was made to deliver a pound of flesh, a reference to Shylock's desire for revenge, to Mr James. It seems he declined to accept it. The Llanelli Herald has the details.
I said a few words to the Llanelli Herald and BBC Wales before and after the hearing, including this statement;
"This was a pointless, wasteful and vindictive exercise against a critic of the council and has nothing to do with any 'obligation to the taxpayer', if it was, then the council wouldn't have funded the chief executive, unlawfully, in the way they did, this is about destruction. The charge is more than our home is worth and will never be realised. I will continue to fight, and continue to blog, and the next step will be to try and stop the chief executive's attempt to force sale of our home. Another deeply vindictive and unnecessary action.
As ever, I would like to thank everyone who has supported me and all those who have sent messages of goodwill."
3rd December; For Cneifiwr's take on recent events see 'Pecking Order', an excellent analysis, as ever.
------------------------------------------
First of all I must apologise for the lack of 'normal' blogging. Caebrwyn always keeps a watching brief but, to be honest, the recent actions of the chief executive and the council have been a bit of a distraction. And not just recently, the whole year has been a bit difficult. Having said that, it will be business as usual in due course. I hope.
The actions of 'the council' to place the Final Charging Order on my home for £190,390 court costs will be heard next week (Friday 2nd December, in Carmarthen). The chief executive's plan, to force sale of our home, is currently making its way through the court process, and, with no sign of abating, a date will be set for that hearing before long.
The two actions are not separate, the lines between public and private are blurred and the motives for both are unique. This is not about financial ruin as they know I have no finances to ruin other than the family home, it's about destruction.
As I've said before, I stand by everything I've written over the past seven years. In my view I have scrutinised the local council and those that make decisions, nothing more and nothing less. I have been motivated by trying to open up an organisation which has acted like a Victorian gentlemens' club for the past 100 years, not by "revenge" or "malice".
This whole episode started by my attempt to film a meeting, this made a small but positive impact, leading to webcasts, greater public scrutiny, greater public engagement, interest and understanding of local democracy. If it led to one less thing being swept under the carpet then it's been a good thing. Incidentally, a reference I made to 'lumpy carpets' in relation to the decision to keep the investigation into the Pembrey Country Park scandal in-house, formed part of the chief executive's weird and wonderful list of 'criminal' complaints to the police earlier this year.
The ins and outs, and legal (or illegal) points of all this have been covered by this blog, and, more eloquently, by others. There will be more to come.
However, I'd like to make a few comments.
Firstly the £190k defence costs, the subject of next week's hearing. The decision to pursue me was made, in March this year, by the Plaid Cymru led Executive Board, along with input from Gravell, Palmer etc, and with the guiding hand (possibly literally) of the chief executive no doubt. Details from the exempt report, along with the Executive Board decision were leaked to the press and the Herald commented on the whole business, as I did, here.
This is being done on the pretext of an obligation to the taxpayers. Let me assure you it is not. There was not one iota of concern when the chief executive was illegally bankrolled for his counterclaim, there was a possible risk of £100k for that alone, with no knowledge of whether I could meet those costs or damages if I lost and the damages were never covered by insurance anyway. Cllr Sian Caiach has recently mentioned the then secret report which went to the executive board in 2012 recommending the indemnity. You may recall it was approved, and added to, by Mr James himself prior to the meeting, the meeting in which he remained...
And let's not forget the second Public Interest report from the Wales Audit Office which declared the chief executive's pension arrangements equally unlawful. As for the strange decision to pay off a third party loan for a private company, Scarlets Regional Ltd, obligations to the taxpayer couldn't have been further from anyone's mind. My comments regarding this payment also featured in Mr James' police complaint.
One (unintended I'm sure) consequence of Mr James' attempt to involve the police was that the police found no evidential basis to pursue the "criminal" findings in Tugendhat's civil judgement which had formed the basis of Mr James' belated complaint.
As I have said, the serious findings in Tugendhat's judgement in 2013 led to my insurance being revoked, the police looked at the same evidence as the judge and saw, and found, that I had no case to answer. The episode revealed a lot about the mindset of Mr James as well as reinforcing the fact that the judgement was a horrendous miscarriage of justice. Will the courts take any notice of the police outcome in respect of the £190k court order? I don't expect so, neither will it take into account, I don't suppose, that the enforcement action is malicious and punitive.
Plaid Cymru supposedly 'inherited' the situation created by the previous administration of Independents Meryl and Pam and Labour's Kevin Madge, and at one time, in opposition Plaid were all guns blazing. And if you think that the chief executive had no hand in putting them 'in power' then, in my opinion, think again. What better way to silence opposition than to offer the Reverend Dole thirty pieces of silver, or in this case, £48k per year as leader of the council, still with Meryl and Pam in tow of course, In return, Dole has played the chief executive's game and enjoyed the trappings of power, trips to the hospitality box of the Liberty Stadium are not for the likes of lowly opposition councillors.
Cllr Dole has denied that the payments were unlawful, even challenging the qualifications of the appointed auditor (on behalf of Mr James) and has continued to authorised further use of public money in solicitors costs and court fees to pursue me for something I don't have.
Which brings me on to the chief executive. He has certainly kept to his promise to "vigorously pursue the payment of damages due to me, by all legal means" (my underline). Earlier this year he made a less than accurate statement to the press that I had made no offers regarding his damages when in fact he knew I had.The issue of whether he's going to give it back to the council, or 'good causes, or immortalise himself as a gold plated statue in Notts Square is all a moot point for me at the moment, and him. He hasn't had it yet.
I understand that Mark James CBE is a religious man, I am not religious and cannot imagine myself ever threatening to make a family homeless.
Perhaps Mr James should re-familiarise himself with Matthew 16:26 "For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, but loses his soul?"
Whilst the Reverend Dole is preaching the Christmas message at his local chapel, and Mr James CBE says Grace before carving his Christmas turkey, I hope they consider the importance of family, and most of all the importance of the family home.
24 comments:
This is a frightening and disgusting situation that you find yourself in. Have you considered setting up an appeal for funds? You would need to publicise the situation more widely...perhaps the Taxpayers alliance would be interested or some of the national newspapers. Does the Guardian know about it?
Don't forget Pam Palmer anti-poverty champion. I think Cllr Dole is only described as a part-time minister.
Anon 12.31 Part time minister - part time Christian???
To quote Mahatma Gandhi:- There is a higher court than courts of justice and that is the court of conscience. It supercedes all other courts.
A few bible lessons might be in order for those who profess to be christian!
An excellent clear and concise post explaining indisputable facts.This indeed should go nationwide.I think it should go to the Attorney General and perhaps even Parliament and the house of lords.The Welsh Assembly is obviously culpable in allowing CCC to become an out of control authority with its chief executive the worst of all.
You really need to bring this to the attention of the BBC/HTV news teams etc and also Watchdog and other such investigative journalistic places.
As those above, the more the public know about the dark lord and his cronies the better chance you have of redemption.
Only then will you have the moral advantage of deciding whether to forgive him his sins or condemn him to a life of misery reflecting on his misguided ways.... Oh how we wish!
The most frightening of all is that we in Carmarthenshire have a Chief Executive of our, and I say our council, who believes he is untouchable no matter how he conducts himself, elected councillors who are scared of him, have zero integrity and are gutless, officers who show contempt for planning regulations, and make up rules to suit their favourites, even the previous police commissioner likened them all to a mafia, and Ministers in our Government who continue to turn a blind eye to this outrageous scandal, andignore the suffering of those who fall foul of it all. Now that is frightening!!! Where does it leave victims of this out of control council that we pay for???
@J Jones
Hi, thanks for your comment. No, I don't intend to appeal for funds - but, as this has been mentioned before, thanks again to those who have offered.
Can somebody with a Twitter account let @MxJackMonroe know about this? Will help to get exposure
I would like to add that Judge (dread)Tugendhat's claim in court, that a false allegation was made, was plainly wrong. He made his claim based on opinion, not fact, but opinion. He simply believed a witness. There was no evidence. This was totally unjust, and had the direct result of Jacqui being responsible for the damages, the damages that the council are now claiming. MJ tried to resurrect this accusation but has failed because as I have said, there was no evidence to back it up. What was this judge thinking of??.
The major problem with the attempt to pervert the course of justice claim is that NO-ONE, with the exception of the judge himself, claimed it happened. No witness whatsoever - nada!
An attempt to pervert the course of justice is, by definition, a conscious act requiring mens rea (deliberate intent). Jacqui would have to know that her phone wasn't stolen and yet insist that it was in order for this allegation to be made out.
It is NOT an offence for Jacqui to approach the police with an allegation, be told that this is not technically theft (theft requires an intention to permanently deprive - this is more illegal seizure), and then not proceed with an investigation... Happens up and down the country hundreds of times a day.
That a High Court judge could be so ignorant of the law is hard to accept. That a High Court judge would deliberately go out of his way like this to favour one side is also hard to accept...
Either way - there's a lot about this case that is hard to accept - it's continuance not been the least of these concerns.
I console myself with the knowledge that if Jacqui does lose her home, the scrutiny that the press and bloggers will bring to the matter of the indemnity, THAT it was granted and HOW it was granted will be something to behold...
Let's hope they have their answers ready...
'BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT' Isn't that how it's supposed to be in a court of law?
As there was zero evidence produced - how could this Judge make his accusation which has led to this point where Jacqui could lose her home.
Certainly looks like friends in high places. Thank the lord he's retired before he can do any more damage!!!
Beyond Reasonable Doubt is the test used in criminal proceedings (and indeed the test that should have been used to consider attempt to pervert the course of justice.)
Civil court, which this was, uses "The Balance Of Probabilities" - but had no business pronouncing on attempt to pervert - that being a criminal matter to which Jacqui had a right to be tried at the Criminal standard - ie in a criminal court...
To my mind, this is similar to the meter maid finding you committed murder... A more extreme cases perhaps - but the same principles...
Martin.
Don't suppose that judge will let anything spoil his xmas.Probably forgotten all about it anyway.I wish someone would offer to take this forward.It is a huge miscarriage of justice.
Religious?? Perhaps they think nobody is watching... Google sees it was shown...Power,money and homelessness, send prayers and love to these souls...keep up the good work of democracy.
Good luck today Jacqui...
And yet again The Guardian and Evening Post, our local papers,remain silent.
Makes you think ?
Wavell,Yes it does.Their silence is deafening.
So pleased yesterday's judge said what he did.He was an honest one in comparison with the former in this case.Something seriously wrong there.Your MP and ? in Parliament perhaps.Huge miscarriage of justice.There will be more to come from this.
Interesting thought, I had a telephone call from Beaufort Marketing in Cardiff asking me if I would answer a questionnaire , at the behest of the Welsh Audit Office. They are canvassing opinions of residents of their thoughts on the quality of their local authority.
As I was having lunch at the time today, I declined to comment.
So sorry what you had to go through again on Friday Jacqui. The Judge sounded to me as if maybe he wasnt too happy with the situation generally. That is a positive. What I will say is surely sooner or later someone somewhere, with the power and the inclination to help you, will intervene? The most shocking part of this mountain made out of a molehill IMO is the stark fact staring us all in the face of the total lack of interest by anyone in power or position of responsibility. The local Elections are of course next year and I am sure they wish this matter to be disposed of before then, hence the timing of certain actions. Well, no matter where anyone lives, hopefully they will take an objective look at this sorry saga and vote in a certain way to reflect their thoughts. The only one who has shown any guts, humanity and stuck her head above the parapet has been Cllr Caiach. All the others look away whilst you suffer. What a total disgrace.
If the same old suspects stand again in next May's elections with no opportunity for us to vote for someone new and principled, then I suggest that EVERYBODY refuses to vote at all to show our disgust at the way this council has been run. If there could be a mass boycott of the election then surely some notice would have to be taken by the WAG? Would it be possible to organise such a boycott in every ward or am I just being idealistic and impractical?
How many of us would refuse to pay ourcouncil tax??
Cll. Lenny has also put his head above the parapet. In an atmosphere of dictatorship it takes someone with integrity to speak out against Mark James. Where does the Leader stand on this disgrace and what do the rest of them have to say??? What a bunch.
You want to run a People First candidate in every single ward at the election with no prior involvement in local politics, and have them all run with a single day-1 issue at the top of their individual manifestos, above all their other policy commitments they may want to make, and that a promise to throw the doors open, arrange independent transparent audits of every part of the council, clean up any and all corruption, recover any and all funds recoverable, invite an outside police force in to investigate any and all suspicious activity. Perhaps temporarily rename 'People First' as the 'Clean the Augean Stables Party' if that would make it more obvious.
It would have to be people from outside politics entirely, and people with transparent personal histories and no troubling vested interests to boot.
The problem with relying on elections to boot out councillors is that in small rural communities anyone who has no problem with CCC, or is not interested in how a council conducts its business,will always vote for who they know.
Post a Comment