I also attached the Solicitor’s letter from Peter Dunn and Co. to show that it was the Council that had lied to the Ombudsman and not Mr X i.e. me.
It was blocked or bounced by an autoreply13-Jan-20.pdf and it was likely that Mr Palmer had carried out his threat. That was not the expected response from an MP’s office with whom I have been corresponding cordially if not amiably for some years especially as we were both encountering the same problems with the Town Hall.
The contagion (evasive behaviour) has spread from the Town Hall to the Office of the MP and the agent appears to be Mr Palmer.
- 14-Jan-20
- Noticing the block I sent toELBatMP14-Jan-20.pdf in morning. Adding address etc. to message, more details and attach case ZA4803 which has been with her for many years. This also bounces with the auto response, “Please note that if you do not provide your full address no further action will be taken on your case,” confirming that Mr Palmer has carried out his threat.
However it is Mr Buck who responds to my email to Emma of Monday night toELBatMP13-Jan-20.pdf making out it is a response to to the one sent on a Tuesday morning:- from SB_OfficeELB14-Jan.pdf “Thank you for your email sent this morning following from Mr Palmer’s telephone conversation to you yesterday afternoon.” By this means the first email to Emma and the charges in it have been overwritten.
- More importantly there is now no trace of the Solicitor’s letter that I attached to Monday’s email. I had invited Mr Palmer to read it along with the equally ‘lost’ email to Customer Advocacy 02 September 2016 (typo 03-Sep in the email).
I copied the 1st email to Mr Palmer and the three Cllrs and the 2nd to Mr Palmer and the Monitoring Officer and her predecessor, neither were copied to Mr Buck so he will not have seen either the solicitor’s letter nor Case Ref: ZA4803 – an email to ELB 20-Oct-16 .
How come it is Mr Buck who is thanking me and not Mr Palmer?
It is beginning to appear that Mr Palmer had set up Mr Buck as well as yours truly when he tried to provoke me into vexatious comments over the phone. Was it recorded ?
- 15-Jan-20
- toSBuck15-Jan-20.pdf I assumed that when I gave Mr Buck permission to pass my home phone number to Mr Palmer he had become Emma’s new office manager after her re-election. It is beginning to appear that Mr Palmer influence is malign and therefore at odds with the sentiment shown by Emma on the 24th December and Mr Buck allowed Emma’s Office to become an adjunct to the Town Hall setting up the phone call of the 13th.
I particularly found Mr Palmer’s use of the word “vexatious” offensive and in this context I referred to the correspondence with Haley Johnson in 2016 in an email to Nicola. The words she used were actually unreasonable and persistent, not vexatious.
I did not make my point very well as I was more interested in the email’s secondary purpose and that was to establish that the address emma.lewell-buck.mp@parliament.uk was open again. - 16-Jan-20
- toSBandKP16-Jan-20.pdf I let them know that I have a dispute with Mrs Johnson about the misinformation/misrepresentation given to the Local Government Ombudsman. I agree with Mr Tilbury of Peter Dunn & co. that they have mislead the Ombudsman but she maintains that there is no evidence of the Council having done that. The purpose of the email was associate Mr Palmer with Mrs Johnson and to remind the pair of them that I had already sought legal advice.
- 17-Jan-20
- The reason I copied Messrs Buck and Palmer and Nicola Robason in my email to Melanie and the others because it was a potted history and what I said to Angela still remains true and here is a reference to it. This was for information for all and to provide a bulwark against the activities of Messrs Palmer and Buck.
- 23-Jan-20
- It appeared that Mr Palmer was deliberately ignoring what I said to Angela in the spring of 2019 so I wrote to him directly on 23-Jan-20, where the facts were presented in a different way. A harsh but fair criticism of his appraisal of the facts copied to the MP’s mailbox for information and significantly it did not bounce so MP should be aware of my opinion
- 24-Jan-20
- Write to Mr Buck to thank him for removing the Block from his employers, MP Emma Lewell-Buck inbox.
The Block is a device employed by MP’s to filter out complaints from that do not live in their constituencies and it is debatable whether it should be against people who have moved away from the constituency. The offending structure is still in South Shields, it has not moved to Amble nor has the planning office for South Tyneside Council. - 31-Jan-20
- The emails of 15th and 16th January, to Messrs Buck and Palmer, were forwarded to Nicola Robason, as a reminder that case was still open. It was also way of checking that ELB – MP’s inbox was still open. Curiously, so is the inbox of Steven Hepburn MP and he was replaced by Kate Osborne in December 2019.
The main business of the email was to inform the Monitoring Officer that UK Docks had been built nearly 3m taller than permitted and to prove my point I attached an approved drawing from 1996.
~~~~~ End of Round 1 ~~~~~~
A hiatus while I collect my papers from the Solicitors in early February with the intention of leaving them with the Chronicle but discover they no longer have a calling office. I did establish contact with them and sent a warning notice to Angela on 5-Feb but I suspect that the Council will fob them off a Nicola sort of reply:-
My email dated 19 December 2019 set out my position on this matter. It remains the case that all complaints procedures relating to this matter have been exhausted both internally within the Council and externally.
Monitoring Officer, 26-February-2020