'Ruthless' Council Pursue Dying Man for £35.00 Bill, a call was put through to hospital as patient lay in coma! Options

[ihowgate]

It is all quite depressing in this day and age that this can happen. We know people make mistakes, but to carry on as they allegedly have is inexcusable. Perhaps things like this are the 'true' cost of austerity Britain under the Conservatives (not that any other local party would be any different). I have heard allegations of the Liberal Democrat controlled town council being less then candid too.

I have to say I am thrilled that you all are taking such a genuine interest in this - I am afraid that I am so used to the level of corruption we are talking about here that I have become rather immune to it all.

Somehow the Environment Health (which are after all a part of the council) have gone extremely quiet.

The landlord is a very large organisation – almost certainly the same organisation who housed Mr Benyon’s soldier friend and they have now refused to speak with me any further having stated firmly that Mr Smith nor his estate is due any compensation. I witnessed the agreement to pay compensation and that ought to be enough to ensure the estate gets its due but without the money to pay for a funeral there is never going to be money to pay for a legal case against a massive organisation who even Mr Smith’s MP will not challenge.

From what I can see the Council and the landlord have broken about 50% of Mr Smith’s human rights but ironically whilst he was alive he would have qualified for legal aid to get justice but now he is dead it is a much more difficult process and the landlord and the Council know this and are using it as best they can.

I also have to point out that Mr U was not the person who gave the order to fire. The email I have is from a Mr Lowe who was Scrutiny and Partnerships Manager, the other person at the council who had the information and did not abide by M Smith’s wishes was Bill Blackett Revenues and Benefits Manager. It now appears that the department who refused to explain why they had taken some thousand pounds away from Mr Smith is headed by a Mr Wheldon, though to be fair on him his staff always told me that they were under instructions from Mr Lowe and that was why Mr Smith wasn’t allowed the information. Mr U’s comment to the press is pretty much the same one that Mr Lowe’s department gave me when they declined my Freedom of Information Act request and Data Protection Act request for Mr Smith’s details for the aid of his estate – my guess is that this is therefore where the comment came from, though my guess is it is not the place where the person who will take the fall for this will come from.

Local Government Ombudsman is a good suggestion – however they are only able to deal with matter of a personal nature – meaning that the person who makes the application to them needs to be the person who has suffered or would benefit from any rectification that they put in place. Of course neatly in this instance the complainant is dead and hence cannot make a complaint for his own benefit. Even if I could make the application for him – you can only go to the LGO after going through the council’s corrupt complaints process – which takes a minimum of three months and which is governed by the same Mr Lowe mentioned above.

[On the edge]

Thanks for explaining, the penny has dropped and I can now quite see why the sad demise of Mr Smith has frustrated justice. In practical terms, I suppose the best the family could hope for is that someone could find them a good public spirited pro bono solicitor; ideally outside the Newbury circuit. Equally, do any of us have a means to get this on a national agenda?

[mush]

While some people vent their spleen about obnoxious events like a repeat story or poor grammar in the 75p Newbury Weekly News, I was staggered by a story in the paper about a man that was being pursued for a disputed £35.00 tax bill. A call was even made to the hospital he was in, while in a coma! The council had been previously contacted by a representatives of the dying man explaining his condition, but the council would have none of it. This from a council who knowingly fine people for trivial parking 'offences' even when they they have no legal basis for doing so.

Do you think West Berkshire Council's spokes man, Public Relations Manager Mr Keith 'in the interests of confidentiality, we will not discuss individual cases' Ulyatt, was in anyway contrite about the issue? Of course not.

Put it this way, I don't want a council to act in such an abominable way on my behalf!


Story on page 7, column 1. Thursday, 19 September 2013.

[Andy Capp]

This is very similar to the way the NHS works: protectionist.

[mush]

Thanks for explaining, the penny has dropped and I can now quite see why the sad demise of Mr Smith has frustrated justice. In practical terms, I suppose the best the family could hope for is that someone could find them a good public spirited pro bono solicitor; ideally outside the Newbury circuit. Equally, do any of us have a means to get this on a national agenda?

In the original post on this topic, it was said as a matter of fact that the Council rang the hospital about his debts. I'm not clear how anyone knows this was the reason for the phone call. In order to get more clarity on this - because if it was true that the Council would do what is alleged then that is clearly unacceptable - Lib Dem (Opposition) Leader Cllr Jeff Brooks asked a direct Question of the Council's Conservative Leader Cllr Gordon Lundie last Thursday, in a public meeting at which the NWN's reporter was present.
Let's wait and see what Cllr Lundie said. If you don't trust your weekly newspaper, the Q&As at Council meetings are recorded and published on the Council website in due course.
I'm not saying the Council comes up smelling of roses on this but we should at least hear "the other side of the story", within the bounds of confidentiality.
The "national agenda" in all this is the appalling shortage of affordable housing that the past Labour and Tory governments have allowed in this country: not enough new homes meant rocketing rents. It got to the stage that by 2010 about 60% of the Government's housing budget was being spent on subsidising landlords (through housing benefit) instead of bricks and mortar. Tragedies like Mr Smith's saga come from having to spend far too much of our earnings and our tax money on propping up a totally dysfunctional housing and planning system.

[On the edge]

This is very similar to the way the NHS works: protectionist.

So it seems. Must admit thought your post about austerity was a bit OTT - then I though further. Sadly you are right.

[Andy Capp]

In the original post on this topic, it was said as a matter of fact that the Council rang the hospital about his debts. I'm not clear how anyone knows this was the reason for the phone call. In order to get more clarity on this - because if it was true that the Council would do what is alleged then that is clearly unacceptable

Well this story broke at the beginning of the month with our Richard Benyon MP promising to investigate. Well that was over 20 days ago, so what did he find? I think it is also quite unacceptable of our local paper not to have made this story more prominent too! I get a sense of sweeping under the carpet !

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-24...ma-35-bill.html

[motormad]

Is it because NWN and Newbury Today, under instruction from the Council (of which they seem awfully chummy with) are "kindly requested" not to post anything of seriousness (because Parking Fines don't really matter ultimately) which would be defamatory towards the council and certain employees?

After all, there's only so much bandwidth for the important stories - Primary School plays, men stealing Shaving Cream, and minor traffic jams on the A4 - all of which certainly require a full, front-web facing story and huge, poorly written and often mis-spelt write ups in the paper, when this, which I think is probably the biggest shocker to come out of Newbury Council all year, goes unreported.

Honestly, reporters at Newbury Today.........

STOP COVERING THE CRAP THAT COMES OUT OF THIS PATHETIC COUNCIL AND THIS PATHETIC TOWN.
YOU HAVE THE NEWS
****ING REPORT IT.

[ihowgate]

In the original post on this topic, it was said as a matter of fact that the Council rang the hospital about his debts. I'm not clear how anyone knows this was the reason for the phone call. In order to get more clarity on this - because if it was true that the Council would do what is alleged then that is clearly unacceptable - Lib Dem (Opposition) Leader Cllr Jeff Brooks asked a direct Question of the Council's Conservative Leader Cllr Gordon Lundie last Thursday, in a public meeting at which the NWN's reporter was present.
Let's wait and see what Cllr Lundie said. If you don't trust your weekly newspaper, the Q&As at Council meetings are recorded and published on the Council website in due course.
I'm not saying the Council comes up smelling of roses on this but we should at least hear "the other side of the story", within the bounds of confidentiality.
The "national agenda" in all this is the appalling shortage of affordable housing that the past Labour and Tory governments have allowed in this country: not enough new homes meant rocketing rents. It got to the stage that by 2010 about 60% of the Government's housing budget was being spent on subsidising landlords (through housing benefit) instead of bricks and mortar. Tragedies like Mr Smith's saga come from having to spend far too much of our earnings and our tax money on propping up a totally dysfunctional housing and planning system.

You make a fair point about reason for the call. What I can say is that I have an email dated almost exactly teh same date as the call from David Lowe at the council responding to my request that due to Mr Smiths state in a coma that they now decist from chasing him directly for this money and accept the letter of authority and verbal authority that he had given them no less than three times - weeks before he went into hospital and which they had declined to accept - totally illegally I might add. In that e-mail David Lowe says that the Council is taking steps to deal with Mr Smith directly on this matter and that my involvement is not required. I go back to him immediately pointing out the lucirous nature of what he has said - I can supply the emails if you want to see them the Mail has already scrutinised them all however and they were content to publish - and cautioning him again against bothering Mr Smith. They then made a call teh same day - whether this was to collect money or not it is appauling considering that Mr Smith had made it abundantly clear that he did not want to have to talk to them himself and wanted and needed the support of someone like me - he was a disabled, critically ill man with learning difficulties and he had asked the council to let him speak through the only person whom he could afford - me.

I also spoke to the nurse who took the call and she said they were quite instistant that they needed a call back and could they please get teh next of kin to call them back - but only after they had discovered that Mr Smith was in a coma. Whatever teh reason for the call - this is unacceptible in anyone's book.

However the council were confronted with what they had done by email on more than one occasion immediately after Mr Smith's death and given morethan adequate time to come back with a simple denial or explanation for doing what they did and they have not done so. Under no law would it be a breach of confidentiality or data protection to say 'actually we didn't do that' 'it wasn't about his council tax'? But really what else could their reason be??? And if they had a legitimate reason which was not about the council tax they alleged he owed which actually I coudl fine no reason why he should owe in teh first place then why did they not come back to me and tell me at the time - instead of taking action to disturb a critically ill man and his diabled 84 year old mother in a way that looks like them bullying vulnerable people to get money out of them without giving them a right to know why they are meant to owe it?

Personally I think they have had more than enough time to explain themselves and they are refusing - the council exec will only come back wth more fudge and word play.

[On the edge]

.....Tragedies like Mr Smith's saga come from having to spend far too much of our earnings and our tax money on propping up a totally dysfunctional housing and planning system.

Be that as it may; good manners cost nothing!

[ihowgate]

Well this story broke at the beginning of the month with our Richard Benyon MP promising to investigate. Well that was over 20 days ago, so what did he find? I think it is also quite unacceptable of our local paper not to have made this story more prominent too! I get a sense of sweeping under the carpet !

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-24...ma-35-bill.html

Just thought that you might want to know that on 21st August I wrote to Brian Bedwell - teh Conservative Chair of the Council's Oversight, Scrutiny and Monitoring Commission about Mr Smith - explaining about his being chased in Hospital and including the following comment:

'I was heartened to think that the Chairman of the Scrutiny committee would no doubt be on hand to pick up this matter and would know who best in the council should be there to correct the problems. I am correct that it is the role of the scrutiny committee to ensure that mistakes like these do not happen or at least do not happen more than once?

So I am bringing this matter to your attention and rest confident that in your public duty you will see that these horrific errors are corrected and never allowed to happen again. It is of course urgent that this information is released promptly to prevent any further hurt and distress and make sure that Mr Smith's good name is expunged as quickly as possible.'

He responded the next day with "As chairman of OSMC I do not have any additional powers than any other me,mber, I can ask the Commission to investigate issues but that has to be done during normal meetings."

As yet we have heard nothing back from Mr Bedwell nor his commission - so it is not only Mr Benyon who is proving less than prompt and useful in protecting his constituents in line with their elected duty.

[Simon Kirby]

Sorry if you've said already Ian, but who is Mr Smith's ward councillor, and what has been their involvement to date. Also, who is the councillor with responsibility for the department that collects the council tax, and what has been their involvement so far?

[ihowgate]

The "national agenda" in all this is the appalling shortage of affordable housing that the past Labour and Tory governments have allowed in this country: not enough new homes meant rocketing rents. It got to the stage that by 2010 about 60% of the Government's housing budget was being spent on subsidising landlords (through housing benefit) instead of bricks and mortar.

Interesting - did you realise that my involvement in this was called for because Sovereign Housing were seeking to evict Mr Smith from the very flat that the H&S directorate had deemed unfit for human habitation?

And the reason for eviction was the arrears that had built up against Mr Smith.

These arrears were due to deductions made by WBC before paying the Housing benefit Mr Smith was entitled to.

When we went to enquire why they had been making deductions – pointing to the latest one only two weeks earlier - the Council staff told us that they did not have a clue why the money had been deducted – that it was probably a ghost in the machine.

We then pointed out the enormous number of previous deductions and asked about these – they promised to investigate and come back to me by the end of the day but then Mr Lowe stepped in and the shutters came down and the ‘direct’ bullying started.

Perhaps you are right - this was a central government agenda designed to reduce the amount of spending on Housing Benefit? Maybe this is why the Council and Richard Benyon both seem intent upon not letting the information on these deductions see the light of day?

I had a similar experience with the Council and Richard Benyon over a miscalculation of the Local Housing Allowance – which would definitely fit with an intention to artificially bring rental rates down in the area by not giving people on HB enough money to pay their rents. NWN wouldn't print my letter or report on this issue even though it adversely affected landlords and benefit claimants and property prices across Newbury.

I really think you might be on to something here – I will go and look at what else I can tie up with this awesome observation of yours. ‘Well done - take a pound out of the till’ – as my old dad would have said.

[Andy Capp]

It is this sort of thing that makes one feel that perhaps some people are 'members of the same club'. What we need to realise is that today it is Mr Smith, tomorrow it would be someone else.

I suspect at the bottom of this lies 'bean counters' and 'lawyers'. I'd be surprised if this was all the work of councillors.


ihowgate, have you looked to raise the profile of this on Facebook, etc?

[ihowgate]

It is this sort of thing that makes one feel that perhaps some people are 'members of the same club'. What we need to realise is that today it is Mr Smith, tomorrow it would be someone else.

I suspect at the bottom of this lies 'bean counters' and 'lawyers'. I'd be surprised if this was all the work of councillors.


ihowgate, have you looked to raise the profile of this on Facebook, etc?

Actually it appears that the next person has already been picked and it is me. The Council have made some allegations that I have done something wrong - which supposedly makes me unsafe to work with a man and his family - but having disclosed this to the police they refuse to tell me what I am supposed to have done. They have now decided that I am not allowed to be treated like other residents and am not allowed access to my own information and advice from council staff on my personal dealings with the council - other than through - you guessed it David Lowe. It is all starting to feel like we are living in a police state.

What is worse the council have also made up some allegations about the man - whose family I was trying to help. They claimed that he had been sent to prison for attempted murder - which is entirely untrue (today we received a document admitting that the police have confirmed that it is untrue). But this hasn't stopped our council pursuing a case against this man to try to hand his children to his alcoholic wife based solely on her testimony and this completely misrepresented incident which even they will claim occurred more than ten years ago and hence can hardly be relevant today.

Am I going crazy or is this all completely surreal?

I used to be a director of compliance from a FTSE100 financial institution, if someone in that firm behaved like David Lowe has behaved then the first thing that would happen is that he would be suspended and an investigation would take place to prove whether he was safe to carry on his role or not before someone else got hurt. But at WBC we have something completely different, the person who has their rights suspended is the person who was representing the injured man (seemingly because the Council can reek their revenge no further on that injured man – because he is dead) and the culprit of the misconduct is not only allowed to continue in his role but is allowed full rein to influence the potential investigators (if any are actually appointed) from his significant position of influence and power and as scrutiny manager has probably chosen no one less than himself to do the investigating. It all sounds completely Machiavellian to me – like something out of 1960s Russia or the Spanish inquisition.

[Simon Kirby]

Actually it appears that the next person has already been picked and it is me. The Council have made some allegations that I have done something wrong - which supposedly makes me unsafe to work with a man and his family - but having disclosed this to the police they refuse to tell me what I am supposed to have done. They have now decided that I am not allowed to be treated like other residents and am not allowed access to my own information and advice from council staff on my personal dealings with the council - other than through - you guessed it David Lowe. It is all starting to feel like we are living in a police state.

It sounds as though the Council have invoked their Vexatious Complainant policy - all of your communicatins get channelled through one officer. Curiously enough, one of the triggers for declaring you to be a Vexatious Complainant is that you attempt to take up your complaint with your ward councillor - they may have changed their policy, but it looked like that last time I looked. Taking the issue to the press is almost certainly also a trigger.

[ihowgate]

It sounds as though the Council have invoked their Vexatious Complainant policy - all of your communicatins get channelled through one officer. Curiously enough, one of the triggers for declaring you to be a Vexatious Complainant is that you attempt to take up your complaint with your ward councillor - they may have changed their policy, but it looked like that last time I looked. Taking the issue to the press is almost certainly also a trigger.

Sounds like you have been there also Simon. If so are you still in that category and do you know how long it lasts?

[On the edge]

I find the Council even having a vexatious complainant policy, where they take it on themselves to act as judge and jury, offensive in the extreme. This is wholly against our British constitution (and yes we do have one) and our common law. Have we really gone back to the worst excesses of the Court of Star Chamber? Does anyone at West Berkshire Council really understand what the Civil War was all about - quite popular round here at one time. Frankly, whoever came up with the idea of this policy isn't fit for a career in public service.

This is very dangerous indeed, we are sleepwalking into a totalitarian state.

[JeffG]

This is wholly against our British constitution (and yes we do have one)

We do? I've been misinformed, then. (Or are we talking about the 1215 one?)

(I agree with everything else you said.)

[Andy Capp]

I find the Council even having a vexatious complainant policy, where they take it on themselves to act as judge and jury, offensive in the extreme. This is wholly against our British constitution (and yes we do have one) and our common law. Have we really gone back to the worst excesses of the Court of Star Chamber? Does anyone at West Berkshire Council really understand what the Civil War was all about - quite popular round here at one time. Frankly, whoever came up with the idea of this policy isn't fit for a career in public service.

This is very dangerous indeed, we are sleepwalking into a totalitarian state.

I doubt it is a policy, more vultures lawyers' advice.