Stockport Council News

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/town-hall-protester.html

Independent Police Complaints Commission
Reference number 2013/004375
Your letter date 18 March 2013

You inform me that Greater Manchester Police Professional Standards Branch have applied to dispense with the need to investigate my complaint, on the grounds that it is more than 12 months since an incident that give raise for the complaint.

You instruct me to provide good reason for (if there is any) the delay in submitting the complaint.

The complaint is made following my 999 call on the incident date, following which the attending Greater Manchester Police Officers (GMP) instructed me the issues were not police matters and these matters should be reported to the local authority Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (SMBC), these directions from the officers then backed up in a letter, that the GMP were not taken any action (no offence committed) led to on the same day as receiving letter from GMP (no delay first chance) submitting the complaint to SMBC, their investigation also upheld no offence no evidence, and complaint progressed to the Local Government Ombudsman York (LGO) complaint in progress still no delay,

Following the LGO’s investigation and on receipt by letter the complaint was not within their remit and the incident as directed was a matter for the police, on receiving the LGO findings 17 October 2012 the complaint was then forwarded to GMP professional standards no delay complaint come full circle (Greater Manchester Police to Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council. to Local Government Ombudsman York back to Greater Manchester Police and now passed to Independent Police Complaints Commission, same complaint no delay’s by myself in submitting complaint, only that the misdirection from GMP officers has contributed to the time active investigations by all bodies involved in the same complaint).

Further information if there is any delay then why on the 8th November 2012 was I arrested following receipt. of a letter from GMP professional standards branch dated 6th November 2012 over the issues of the incident in 2009 (if my complaint can’t be investigated then would it be proportional not to be arrested for submitting my complaint).

On this application, I request to apply The Rule of Law to the investigation into my complaint, and give notice to breaches of The Human Rights Act 1998 Article 6 by Local Authorities to act compatible with the agreed rights.

I do not believe I have delayed my complaint the question, open to further complaint if required “is there any delay to process the complaint which came about any action of the Local Authorities”, it is in my understanding that the IPCC only investigate police Misconduct (GMP officers in their delay by mis-guidance “this is not a police matter and guidance to put any complaint elsewhere is subject of misdirection and failure to protect those to un-lawfulness and injustice.

Further information the GMP Professional Standards Branch informed me that they could not investigate while trial was pending for the arrest 8th November 2012 with hearing date 21st January 2013 no trial date revived discontinuance, the Greater Manchester Police, The Crown Prosecution Service and Stockport Magistrates Court give no information to when a hearing or trial date is to be heard (breach art 6 HRA 1998).

Please consider my request not to dispense the need to investigate my complaint, as this is required to bring about a stopping of the harassment victimisation and suffering, also associated losses, time and finances.

Yours respectfully M S Parnell.

Dear Mrs Oliver,

I am writing in response to your request for information (ref FOI 6799).

The relevant Council Service(s) has searched for the requested information and our response is as follows.

What exactly is “refund of liquidated damages deducted for Vale View School Project”?

‘Under the building contract, the employer is entitled to deduct liquidated damages in the amount specified in the contract documents from payments due to the contractor. This sum is expressed as £/per calendar week or pro rata thereto and is deducted where the contractor fails to complete the works by the contract completion date or any extended date that may be awarded under the contract. Vale View had a damages figure of £16,800 per calendar week and at the point of deduction the contract had overrun the completion date by 2 weeks and 2 days. Requests by the contractor for extensions of time to the completion date are allowed under the terms of the contract which are then considered by the Employers Agent. A request for an extension of time was received following the deduction of damages which was subsequently approved by the Employers Agent for the full period of 2 weeks and 2 days. The result of this extension to the original completion date was to reimburse the contractor the amount of damages previously deducted being the sum of £38,400.’

Question –

Why have I paid BAM £60,361.02 for construction work in October 2012 when the school has been opened well over a year?

Answer received – 13/03/13 at 15.31

Dear Mrs Oliver,

I am writing in response to your request for information (ref FOI 6704). The relevant Council Service(s) has searched for the requested information and our response is as follows.

The payment is part of the ongoing process of settling the contract final account. This interim payment of £60,361.02 includes the valuation of the following items:

1. Additional works to reception area

2. External works delayed/postponed due to weather/time of year

3. Firming up final costs within the account

Email received 12th March 2013 at 14.40

Dear Mrs Oliver,

I am writing in response to your request for information (ref FOI 6817).

The relevant Council Service(s) has searched for the requested information and our response is as follows/attached/enclosed.

Further to your FOI request I can confirm that a budget of £31,000 has been allocated for the provision of meals before evening Council and Committee meetings. Depending on the nature of the meeting, this may be a hot meal or a cold sandwich buffet meal.

The figure specifically for ‘Councillors Teas’ for this financial year is £15,638.

The Council intends to buy up property in Stockport Market. This would be fine if they had any sort of track record of successful regeneration. They don’t! They just keep borrowing in our name with no results.

http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/documents/s25901/Notice%20of%20intention%20to%20hold%20an%20Executive%20meeting%20in%20Private%20-%20Strategic%20Property%20Acquisition%20in%20the%20.pdf