Dear Rajat Jain
How nice to see that our letters sent to the Prime Minister, the Lord
Chancellor and Gordon Brown etc., regarding the closing down of our case by
the ICO, and other public sector corruption, have made you open our case yet
again.
That our untiring efforts have at last, brought a response from you in
relation to your undemocratic closing down of our case. We still fear that
your public sector investigators will be severely restrictive in their
approach to transparency and wherever possible, give protection to public
sector miscreants. It hardly needs to be said, that after some 4 years of
public sector shenanigans, we have little trust left in public sector
complaint proceedings!
We are severely upset at our treatment by the entrenched 5th column
style of civil service obstruction towards honest complainants. I myself, in
order to get some justice unobtainable within the public sector complaints
procedures, have had to resort to walking around Whitehall with a placard
complaining about Parliamentary Ombudsman Corruption. (Photo enclosed) It was
a struggle for me. I am a war pensioner lately suffering from cancer and the
after effects. I am not happy being corruptly handled by a corrupt civil
service cover-up industry.
You need to get some sense of my outrage when I stood at the Cenotaph, trying
to equate 'honest' dead soldiers with 'dishonest' civil servants!
We are however, concerned that
this enforced intervention by the PM etc. will make the ICO declare, very much
like your colleague the Parliamentary Ombudsman, that the ICO can see 'No
evidence of fraud or corruption in our case”.
Or that the exceptional corrupt
acts by Mrs Lai Kit, aided by the Parliamentary Ombudsman's protective
fabrications are the NORM within public sector complaint procedures and are
therefore allowable against complainants?
We realise on
reading this letter, you way well want to take exception to our taxpaying
attitude-that our tone is not submissive enough. We would like you to take
into account the amount of corruption and fraudulent deceit we have had to
cope with. We are, at our age at low ebb! My wife, after the Ombudsman's
inspired evening telephone calls, is now frightened. But we have learned that
when complaining about public sector corruption and its various miscreants-there is no room for a stifling genteel approach!
We are worried that the fraudulent Parliamentary Ombudsman's Westminster 'porkies' will go unnoticed or at least unreported by this Freedom Of
Information scrutiny. It would be both undemocratic and a blight on the Mother
of Parliament, if such a high ranking civil servants misdeeds be overlooked-even buried-or conveniently by-passed?
Because of our experience in dealing with governmental complaint procedures,
we are worried at the public sectors wanton misinterpretations of incidents in
our case, so we again write of the corrupt actions that we have suffered at
the hands of civil servants!
(1) We were told our appeal to
the VOA was too late, a lie!
(2) We were told our
appeal was invalid, a lie!
(3)
Because we realised our
case was being mishandled, we asked for reports, something we were
entitled to. Six weeks we waited for an answer-none came! So we had to chase
up for a response, that proved to be corrupt!
(4) We were then told a Mrs
Gupta had been allocated to our case and would do a report and 'be in touch'!
Betrayed by such concerted corrupt deception, we sat back waiting for the
GUPTA REPORT.
(5) Some 18 months later we
discovered Mrs Gupta`s did not exist as far as our case was concerned. She
(Mrs Gupta) was malevolently manufactured by a VOA miscreant This was pure
satanic corruption by an uncivil highly protected civil servant! All this
from a severely dysfunctional Government Agency-the VOA.
Because we were
upright in our condemnations, we were now being
abused because we were mentioning corrupt acts by civil servants!
(6) This corrupt invention of
Lai Kit's purposely bulldozed away our appeal.
(7) We wrote for months asking
the VOA for copies of the 'Gupta report' they never answered-they simply
covered up this corrupt act. They never 'let on' it did not exist, allowing us
to continually write for copies. How corrupt can you get?
(8) Having pushed on about the
corrupt Lai Kit, she then issued us with Notice of Withdrawal Forms to sign
and return to her-having been caught out-Lai Kit was now trying to get us
to withdraw our appeal? We refused-She issued more Forms. We were being
belligerently handled.
(9) Because of our continued
complaints about the 'dysfunctional VOA office and Lai Kit, the VOA decided to
hold a 'proper' investigation?
(10) Now taking into account the corrupt handling of our
case from the outset; the 'too late lie'. The corrupt claim that our appeal
was 'invalid'. The issuing of fraudulent Notice of Withdrawal Forms and the
'corrupt invention' of Mrs Gupta etc. The verdict of
the VOA's 'proper' public sector investigation, was that the corrupt Mrs Lai
Kit had acted with the 'BEST OF INTENTIONS?'
(11) THIS WAS UNBRIDLED VOA INSPIRED INSTITUTIONALISED PUBLIC SECTOR
CORRUPTION ! UPHELD BY THE OMBUDSMAN!
(12) Then, when we asked the
VOA for information regarding their corrupt miscreant, the VOA in as many
words informed us she was untouchable-even from the FOI act. We began to
realise this was as an undemocratic public sector cover-up industry of
shattering political proportions. No complainant was safe from the public
sectors 'inner squalor' fraudulence!
IT WAS ABOUT THIS TIME WE CALLED THE ICO IN FOR HELP? THIS ICO
'HELP' NEEDS TO BE SCRUTINISED FOR ITS LACK OF TRANSPARENCY AND
UPRIGHT ACCOUNTABILITY?
(13) To make matters worse at a much later date the Parliamentary Ombudsman
fabricated evidence (porkies) in an attempt to get the corrupt uncivil servant
Mrs Lai Kit and the corrupt VOA 'off the hook”!
(14) We even had to endure a Parliamentary Ombudsman 'browbeating' telephone
survey team, that pestered us in the evenings, despite us informing her quite
clearly, that we did not want to take part? Human Rights?
You will appreciate we and others, as taxpayers are
extremely interested as to what part of this corrupt saga the Information
Commissioner is going to investigate?
WE FAIL TO SEE HOW ONE CORRUPT ACT CAN BE SINGLED OUT FROM THE
WHOLE. HOW (1) THE ENORMITY OF MRS LAI KITS CORRUPT ACTIONS, AND (2)
THE OMBUDSMAN'S PROTECTIVE FABRICATIONS OF MRS LAI KIT`S CORRUPT ACTS
CAN BE SEPARATED BOTH ARE JUST AS DESTRUCTIVE TO PARLIAMENTARY
DEMOCRACY.
We have mentioned that the ICO`s closing down our case nicely coincided
with the Parliamentary Ombudsman's act that corruptly closed down our case
also. No matter how much protestation there might be, it stands out like
public sector collusion!
Despite your claim that the PO is investigating the ICO (can you tell us what
about?), we think this is a red herring, we know that the ICO and the
Ombudsman are collusive and extremely friendly. That the last time you refused
to answer our letters the PO came to your aid with her usual 'slap on wrist'
public sector protection racket.
Untold thousands of complainants have in the past, been waylaid, by-passed,
unbalanced by public sector deceits and excuses, especially now, where the
entrenched apologetic routine is now rightly seen by the public as nothing
more than a ruse. Niceties from the public sector investigations are
invariably costly to the complainant
We are forcibly talking about;
(1) The corrupt way our case
was handled.
(2) The scheming cover-up VOA 'investigation' designed to get the corrupt
individual Mrs Lai Kit off the hook. Even the ICO`s claim that the fraudulent
VOA had made an'honest oversight” was indicative of the 'old
pals act'..
(2) The corrupt involvement of
the Parliamentary Ombudsman.
(6) Our fight in old age and
sickness, to overcome the collusive entrenched public sector cover-up
industry.
(7) Where almost
simultaneously both the ICO and the Parliamentary Ombudsman undemocratically
closed down our case? Denying us our human rights!
We realise you may want to take the least hurtful road in order to protect
your civil service colleagues. We are ever mindful (as mentioned before) as
when we asked you to investigate the corrupt Valuation Office Agency, you
inexplicably described them has having made an 'HONEST OVERSIGHT?' We have
yet to find it?
We are also afraid and aware, as mentioned before, that you may well want to
take a leaf from the Parliamentary Ombudsman and declare 'You see no
evidence of fraud or corruption'!
We would hope that no such Parliamentary Ombudsman style excuses are to be
issued against us. We cannot help noticing that you have, for the SECOND
TIME, promised to move towards a DECISION NOTICE. We hope that this
second promise of yours will be more fruitful than the first?
You indicate that the DECISION NOTICE may well take some time? Well, we are
now well into our 4th year, we are used to such public sector
proceedings!
We can only say it will give us more time to broadcast the corruption to be
found within the public sectors corrupt complaint procedures, and hopefully
unravel even more public sector 'porkies'!
We remain much bruised and hurt by the abuse of our civil liberties and human
rights!
Yours sincerely
AW & I Tanner