Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Tuesday, September 2, 2014
Sunday, August 10, 2014
The Public Accounts Committee have just published a report were it finds what Civil Service whistleblowers like myself have been telling them for years: That the Civil Service punishes people who blow the whistle, that staff who victimize them have no disciplinary action taken against them,and the Civil Service Commission are not fit for purpose. Nice to hear others admit what you have been saying for years. Meanwhile, you can read all about it in the independent by going here.
Monday, June 30, 2014
.jpg)
Friday, May 16, 2014
Tuesday, May 13, 2014
I have copied and pasted a copy of an e-mail I got from Paddy Dillon of the Information Commissioner's Office.
Case Reference Number RCC0539953
Dear Mr Ali
I write further to your recent email raising concerns about a telephone conversation you had with Michael Avery on 2 May 2014. You consider that Mr Avery spoke to you in an inappropriate way.
I am sorry that you are not satisfied with the service you have received in this case. I am aware that you called Mr Avery in response to his letter and email of 28 April 2014 regarding your complaint about a request to the Cabinet Office. I was sitting within earshot of Mr Avery during the call and have also discussed his reasons for terminating the call with him.
Mr Avery explained that early in the call you sought to raise matters relating to a previous case he had handled involving the Civil Service Commission. You have also referred to this case in your email to me. However, that case was closed some time ago and has been considered by the Tribunal. It does not have a bearing on the Cabinet Office case currently under consideration and there is no further purpose in us discussing that matter with you.
Mr Avery has also explained that he terminated the call because he did not consider it was serving a useful purpose owing to the fact that you were not allowing him to finish speaking. It appears that both sides of the conversation may have become slightly frustrated during the call.
However, on the basis what I heard of Mr Avery’s handling of the call, I do not consider that he spoke in an unacceptable way. He asked you to allow him to make his points but then explained he would terminate the call. He also invited you to submit any points you wished to make in writing. If you do have further points to make about the Cabinet Office case, I agree that it may be beneficial to submit your points in writing.
Your complaint about the Cabinet Office remains open and will be handled by Mr Avery. I note your request during our conversation on 2 May for the case to be reallocated, but I do not consider this appropriate or necessary. In all cases handled by the ICO, decisions are reached on the basis of the information available in the case. Where either party disagrees with the decision reached in a Decision Notice, they have a right of appeal to the Tribunal. Therefore, if you are unhappy with the eventual outcome of the case, you will be able to consider an appeal.
However, it is important to note that a decision has not been reached on your case yet. Mr Avery has written to the Cabinet Office with some enquiries to assist him in reaching a decision. Therefore I would suggest that, unless you have any further supporting information directly relevant to your request to the Cabinet Office, you do not need to take any further steps at present. You will be contacted in due course with further information about your case.
Yours sincerely
Paddy Dillon
Team Manager, Information Commissioner’s Office
Dear Mr Ali
I write further to your recent email raising concerns about a telephone conversation you had with Michael Avery on 2 May 2014. You consider that Mr Avery spoke to you in an inappropriate way.
I am sorry that you are not satisfied with the service you have received in this case. I am aware that you called Mr Avery in response to his letter and email of 28 April 2014 regarding your complaint about a request to the Cabinet Office. I was sitting within earshot of Mr Avery during the call and have also discussed his reasons for terminating the call with him.
Mr Avery explained that early in the call you sought to raise matters relating to a previous case he had handled involving the Civil Service Commission. You have also referred to this case in your email to me. However, that case was closed some time ago and has been considered by the Tribunal. It does not have a bearing on the Cabinet Office case currently under consideration and there is no further purpose in us discussing that matter with you.
Mr Avery has also explained that he terminated the call because he did not consider it was serving a useful purpose owing to the fact that you were not allowing him to finish speaking. It appears that both sides of the conversation may have become slightly frustrated during the call.
However, on the basis what I heard of Mr Avery’s handling of the call, I do not consider that he spoke in an unacceptable way. He asked you to allow him to make his points but then explained he would terminate the call. He also invited you to submit any points you wished to make in writing. If you do have further points to make about the Cabinet Office case, I agree that it may be beneficial to submit your points in writing.
Your complaint about the Cabinet Office remains open and will be handled by Mr Avery. I note your request during our conversation on 2 May for the case to be reallocated, but I do not consider this appropriate or necessary. In all cases handled by the ICO, decisions are reached on the basis of the information available in the case. Where either party disagrees with the decision reached in a Decision Notice, they have a right of appeal to the Tribunal. Therefore, if you are unhappy with the eventual outcome of the case, you will be able to consider an appeal.
However, it is important to note that a decision has not been reached on your case yet. Mr Avery has written to the Cabinet Office with some enquiries to assist him in reaching a decision. Therefore I would suggest that, unless you have any further supporting information directly relevant to your request to the Cabinet Office, you do not need to take any further steps at present. You will be contacted in due course with further information about your case.
Yours sincerely
Paddy Dillon
Team Manager, Information Commissioner’s Office
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
This is an internal e-mail which proofs that I submitted complaints against Tony Smith and other members of staff prior to their complaints ... -
I can recall a girl called Sharon who never did any work, but somehow manged to get away with it, complaining that she was “fed up with me...
