Still denied of Skype contact

The 10th August 2018.

That was the last day The Priory Group allowed my brother Skype contact with me and our mother and for a mere 1 minute 1 second.
In my opinion, this makes a mockery of the courts and a court order contact schedule that was placed on contact.

Another example of how our mother, who fostered many children over decades, and myself are regarded by Priory Group, their staff, and my local authority.

I remain hopeful of challenging court decisions one day and seeking justice against The Priory Group and particular deceitful and dishonest social care and advocacy staff.


Claims of Mental Health Issues and Harassement 2016

Below is a list of some of my bullet points for a meeting held in 2016, which my local authority told me was a best interests meeting regarding the recurring neglect, abuse, and inadequate care and support of my vulnerable brother.

Some days later, I complained about the ‘professionals’ who failed to provide promised information and uphold agreements made at the meeting. They then later giving varying versions of meeting events in other letters and emails.

I, unfortunately, discovered there was no intention to move my sibling back home, or to an adequate and suitable care home closer to family, nor address concerns.

As you will note in the email below, 

  • For complaining about the negligence of the social worker and advocate, I was accused of having a mental health issue.
  • For emailing to request information and arrange family home visits, I was accused of harassment and ‘doing my own thing’.

While I continue to witness my sibling regress and deteriorate under local authority and Priory Group ‘care’, the above is just one of many in a catalogue of failures and lies made by supposed professionals that my sibling and I have endured over the years. 

I believe the email can evidence local authority priority is to support the provider and NOT the vulnerable in their care and their family members who raise concerns.

Bullet points for meeting 2016

DBest Interests Concerns Meeting 09-2016 (Bullet Points)_Redacted


S Sibanda email regarding meeting

Sarah Sibanda email regarding meeting concerns_Redacted


For the interest of the public, particularly those who have loved ones in care, the person who wrote the email left and went to a different provider:

Do I forgive them for denying my vulnerable brother visits home and being a party to covering up what happened? Absolutely not.


Requested a family home visit Christmas 2019

On Sat, 21st Dec 2019, I sent an email to The Priory Group and their ‘care’ home manager to arrange for a scheduled family home visit for my brother, as per the agreed contact schedule imposed on us. And as our mother and me will not be seeing him for Christmas; denied of this important time together, for the first time in 42 years.

My sent email can be seen below, along with the only response I received; an automated vacation reply. Data suggests my emails are once again being blocked to some Priory Group addresses.

I am doubtful that my request will receive any further response, ignored yet again, as they have so often been so many times over the past five years.

I will write an update in a day or so, whether or not I receive any further response or manage to get my brother home for a short time and an early Christmas with us.

My sent email 21122019s

Gmail - 21122019s_Redacted


Received email 21122019r

Gmail - 211220191041r_Redacted




Christmas 2019

This year, and for the first time in 42 years, my vulnerable adopted brother won’t be home to spend Christmas with my mother and me, he will spend it in a Priory Group ‘care’ home we did not want him to go to, and where I have repeatedly raised concerns.

With communication, a constrained one-way channel with my local authority since their block on such started in 2017, and I remaining denied of being my brother’s representative for almost a decade, I have no route to challenge or appeal our contact.

However, I hope to see him on Monday 23rd for a couple of hours, and cook him a Christmas dinner; but will have no photo/video record for my mother’s memories.

While I’ve witnessed my adopted sibling become de-skilled and regressed in ‘care’ with the negligence of ‘professionals’ who worked to conceal what has occurred. I hope others out there who have a loved one forced into the care system have their situation improved in the coming new year.

And while I feel aggrieved and dispirited at losing my sibling to an institutional care system, at least I can ensure our mother enjoys Christmas this year and is cared for properly.

And to those who know of my continuing care battles, I wish you a HaPpY ChRiStMaS.

Please keep signing and share my petition to parliament regarding CCTV in all care homes where vulnerable people live. Thank you.

Freedom of Information Request – Social Workers

Some weeks ago I submitted a freedom of information request regarding social workers employed by Herefordshire Council, having discovered via a check with the HCPC (Health and Care Professions Council) the one assigned to my vulnerable brother was practising and using the title of social worker before being registered with the HCPC.

Not only did Herefordshire Council claim to not know of this and later say they were employed in another role while using the title of social worker, but they also stated in a freedom of information request the number of social workers struck off by the HCPC was ‘Nil‘, a complete untruth as can be seen in my FOI request and annotations:

Freedom of Information Request comment-88847

I also later asked how many social workers had been reported or struck off by the HCPC between 2013 and 2019, the response and some of the information I requested can be seen in the below link, Please note the response to Q.2 of my request by The HCPC and my annotations:

Freedom of Information Request HCPC Social Workers Struck off Response 1437722



89 Birthday Missed

Today is my mother’s 89 Birthday; sadly, my brother was only allowed to visit us yesterday. And for the first time in over 40 years, we have no Birthday photo/video record of us together due to current CoP restrictions.

Why can’t our family be like any other family?

Refusal to Register Formal Complaint Worcestershire CC

Below is a redacted copy of a letter I received from Worcestershire County Council in response to my letter requesting to register a formal complaint about the deficient safeguarding provided to my vulnerable brother, answers to questions, and an apology.

Where do you go when formal complaints against staff or deficient service provided to vulnerable relatives by a local authority are refused to be recorded, and how often has this happened, and will happen to others?

Worcestershire CC refusal to register formal complaint

JAldred Worcestershire CC Refusal Letter 17-04-2019_Redacted


Unreasonable Behaviour Policy Review 2019

This post may become longer than I anticipated as I am slowly going through collected data for a period of over six years.

On 15th June 2019, I received the below letter from SV (Director of Adults and Wellbeing at Herefordshire Council) informing me of a review of the punitive restrictions that were initially imposed on 13th November 2017 by MS, the former director of Adults and Wellbeing at Herefordshire Council.
The oppressive restrictions were initially imposed as a result of showing several pieces of evidence of recurring neglect and institutional abuse of my vulnerable brother at a meeting on 14th September 2016, and after I raised concern about the competence and negligence of Priory Group employees and other ‘professionals’ involved.
I had first become concerned for my brother at his current placement and raised matters back in March 2015, after the staff of the ‘care’ home failed to monitor a fluid restriction and later let two days pass after my brother suffered a fall, before staff made any attempt to seek medical attention; which resulted in an overnight stay in hospital and suspected fractured ankle which fortunately was only badly bruised.

As a side note, SV removed my unpaid care breaks without notice in March 2018, ignored the refusal of carer support for my elderly mother while I attended hospital for skin cancer surgery on two occasions, having to take her with me into the operating area, and later denied help while I had pneumonia; 14 months on chest pain is only just starting to ease.

You will note, in the letter, SV says ‘Having completed this review, I am satisfied that the above arrangements can successfully operate outside of the unreasonable behaviour policy. As such, I can confirm that the policy no longer applies.’

UBP 13-06-2019_Redacted_opt


When the letters of 13th June 2019 and 13th November 2017 (below) are compared, you will note the only significant change is to the named contacts.
Further item 1 of the letter on 13th June 2019 proposes I am not to contact my brother’s social care team regarding his care, support or concerns, regardless and irrespective of me being an interested party in the health and welfare of my vulnerable brother.

UBP 13-11-17_Redacted


You will not the last paragraph of the letter states ‘Once again I ask you to please note that my offer to meet with you personally in the hope that matters can continue to move forward positively remain’.
In fact, it was I who invited SV, via a solicitor, to meet with my solicitor and me to address long-running concerns and incidents.

And while SV claims, in a separate letter to have offered three dates to meet, via colleagues, this can be evidenced as untrue.
Additionally, by the time I received his letter, the CoP had taken control. I believe the letters were a delaying tactic, and there was no intention to address the neglect and abuse of my brother.

The enthusiasm in attempting to alienate me from my brother, and attempts to remain wilfully ignorant continues, and I believe it is an excellent example of how some family members and unpaid carers involved with Herefordshire Council’s current adult social care personnel are regarded and treated by social care staff from top-level down.
In my opinion, any director who shies away from challenges, makes themselves wilfully ignorant or makes attempts to avoids accountability in the role they are employed is unprofessional and displays a clear weakness of skills. To date, I have received no requested evidence that I have been verbally or physically threatening or intimidating, nor a formal written apology.

In the interest of transparency below are the messages I sent in 2017 to the negligent social worker EG, who had left Herefordshire Council some month prior, and their colleague SC, one colleague who assisted EG in creating erroneous records and failed to report recurring incidents of neglect, distressingly leaving my brother five stones overweight, wearing torn clothing, glassess so dirty they were like frosted windows and with continuing inadequate care and support.



Four months after my FB message to the negligent social worker, EG, I received the below threatening letter from DP (Head of Services for Integrated Adult Social Care at Gloucestershire County Council).

Letter from DP GlosCC-24-10-2017_Redacted


But the Threats, accusations and defamation do not stop here.

After I contacted Gloucestershire police to ask for a case number and inform them of what happened regarding the negligent social worker EG from my side of events, an understanding officer looked at my concerns and frustrations holistically and provided some useful advice.

I then looked further back, into collected data, to when I had a meeting in 2016 with EG, SS (a regional Manager for The Priory Group who as of writing this is employed by Aspirations), PG (one of the managers at the ‘care’ home) and BS (an advocate provided by onside advocacy to address the incidents of neglect and institutional abuse I had reported since March 2015.
After obtaining communications, I discovered, not only had SS and others lied to me and about our meeting agreements; they made vexatious and defamatory claims in emails.
One such email (below) is from SS to colleagues at The Priory Group (SS had no formal mental health qualifications). You will note claims are made about my mental health because I complained about those present at the meeting. SS also makes other spurious claims within this email, which did not match the recording of the meeting in September 2016.




Again, in the interest of transparency, the below is a screenshot of case notes regarding a mental health assessment I was forced to attend in 2018 after a further distressing and stressful two years addressing care concerns for and on behalf of my vulnerable brother. You will note the qualified mental health assessor noted I was stressed but did not have any mental health disorder. Also below is my letter to EG sent shortly after I found there was no intention to uphold agreements made at the meeting in September 2016.

mha2018 (Large)




To date, I have not received data I requested regarding EG’s record of the meetings in 2016, nor a formal written apology regarding the vexatious and damaging accusations and allegations made by supposed professionals and staff of The Priory Group and LA, nor would Herefordshire Council correct false information recorded by their staff. I can only presume, from experience, this is a common practice.



Information Request and Hostile Refusal From Onside Advocacy

A couple of years ago, in 2017, I submitted a request for data to after they blocked my email address. 

I discovered staff had discussed in communications, how I should be ‘handled’ in future, implying I would be discriminated against when contacting the organisation, which has occurred, and after I had challenged the negligence of their provided advocates.

‘discuss how we deal with Chris contacting us in future’

The prejudice became more evident when I received a hostile email response from RT (Data Controller) of onside advocacy on 3rd October 2019 in response to my request for my data on 8th September 2019. The email chain can be viewed in a redacted format below with concerning parts highlighted.

Response to my subject access request

Gmail - SAR (onside 2019) Redacted_highlighted

I have published this in the interest of the public. Particularly those who are forced to deal with this organisation and might be concerned such response is a standard reply to anyone making a second or further request for personal data. Notably, as the data controller stated in the final communication ‘I wanted to make sure I was clear and used wording taken directly from legislation and the ICO website’.

You may notice the aggressive and unprofessional response, absolute rejection and immediate closure of my request conflicts with ICO guidance. 

They did not inform me of or about:

  • How they must consider a request in the context in which it is made and are responsible for demonstrating that it is manifestly unfounded.
  • My right to make a complaint to the ICO or another supervisory authority.
  • My ability to seek to enforce this right through a judicial remedy.

I believe the hostile and unprofessional response I received, if sent to some individuals with similar requests, could be a cause of distress, notably when having no choice but to deal with their organisation.

The information I have requested is essential to the book I am composing, for continuity of fact, and the eventual legal redress I wish to seek for my sibling and I.

As proof that onside have processed further data, below is a screenshot of my message to them on 13th March 2018, which was acknowledged yet received no response other than the whileincare Facebook profile being blocked.