Month: September 2022

Below is the latest unapologetic letter I received from Herefordshire Council’s Head of Legal Services.

Herefordshire Council Francis Fernandes 20-09-2022-redacted

 

Regarding Mr Fernandes’ statement, ‘I am new to the Council and have limited personal knowledge of past issues affecting you’, which conflicts somewhat with his previous letter to me.
Further, it’s also not my ‘perspective’ of the ‘actions of the council or individual officers’, but one of experience and their contempt of court which destroyed my family.  In doing so, Herefordshire Council as an organisation supporting neglectful and inadequate ‘care’ of my vulnerable adopted brother and deceitful social worker staff; one of whom I understand was promoted after assisting the provider to conceal.

His request to ‘draw a line under this matter.’ Herefordshire Council’s distressing campaign of harassment, intimidation, punishment and multiple propositions of legal action against me, since his colleagues willfully chose to conceal neglect and other recurring incidents and misled and deceive the Court of Protection. All while monitoring my personal life, social media and this site, before, during and after.

And as the current paid Head of Legal Services. I hold Mr Fernandes fully accountable for his, his colleagues and the local authorities’ actions and inactions.
While he desires to turn a blind eye, I do not draw a line under abuses and unlawfulness by the LA or his former and current colleagues but continue to keep record.

Nine hundred & twenty-nine days since I last saw or had contact with my vulnerable adopted brother. And much longer since Herefordshire Council abandoned support after they chose to lie to the Court of Protection.
He still doesn’t know our mother passed away in March 2020, thanks to Herefordshire Council and The Priory Group denying him of coming home for her funeral service. Both organisations completely cutting him off from his family and family life.

It’s apparent from checking a little deeper that Herefordshire Council has been monitoring my social media communications & website since at least 2nd March 2017, using search engines to access and view this website, newspaper comments and social media.

They knowing & seeing audio/video & photographic evidence of neglect & incidents I reported raise questions. Including why did LA staff choose to conceal for themselves & The Priory Group, again? And why did the LA later choose to lie to the Court of Protection?
Herefordshire council continuing to monitor me, my social media and web presence. Issuing vexatious threats of legal action while doing so, which they declined to progress when I accepted their proposal.

It also indicates to me that individuals from the top-down, such as the former CEO Alistair Neill, directors & legal staff, were fully aware when they chose to impose their unreasonable behaviour policy on me for raising and exposing concerns & incidents with them, contrary to their comments.

Below is a log of Herefordshire Council visits to this site.
Their search requests via search engines and their visits to my social media linking to this site from LA remote VPN IP addresses. Their main local network access blocked.

This spreadsheet also indicates the data protection officer attempted to deceive me regarding a request for data concerning the LA staff’s monitoring & surveillance. They neglecting to provide such information when I requested it from them.

Hereford Council IP remote access combined2

 

Below is my reply to Reply to Mr Francis Fernandez, Interim Head of Legal Services at Herefordshire Council, regarding their reason and retraction for now ceasing proposed legal action against me. Which I have posted to him.

Herefordshire Council Letter legal action 17-08-2022 my reply-Redacted

 

 

Why was Claire Ward a legal assistant for children’s services at Herefordshire Council receiving post about me when I had no involvement with children’s services?

Claire Ward left the LA later, and after a High Court judge questioned whether children’s services at the council were fit for purpose. Ward acknowledged that the judgment had identified ‘incorrect legal advice’ being given to management.

high court judge questions whether children’s services at council are fit for purpose