Under the above-named Council policy, when I provided evidence to councillors and senior council officers of multi-million pound financial irregularities, they had to act. They didn’t, merely banning me as “vexatious”. Dodgy dealing in LibDem for a decade Stockport seems to be de rigeur.
The Executive Councillors and senior council officers copied in to this email were – Cllr Mark Weldon, Barry Khan, Council Solicitor, John Schulz, then Chief Exec, Cllr Martin Candler and Martin Warburton of the Information Commissioner’s Office. In banning me as “vexatious” for raising these issues, Majothi was himself commiting an offence under the Fraud Act 2006.
Email sent – 23 August 2009 15:14
Dear Mr Majothi
As I understand it the Council’s Fraud and Irregularity Response Procedure states:-
2. Definition
2.1 Fraud is defined within the Fraud Act 2006 as:
“Activity aimed at securing a gain, causing a loss or exposing somebody to a risk of loss, through false representation, failing to disclose information or through abuse of position.”
2.2 Crucially, under the new Fraud Act no gain or loss actually has to happen for a fraud to occur, the act of fraud is entirely defined by the actions or intent of the individual.
2.3 For the purposes of this procedure, the term fraud will be used to cover both fraud and corruption and may also encompass other irregularities.
I note the procedure goes on to list what further action the Council has to take in these circumstances.
I look forward to receiving your comments regarding the above and the action you propose to take regarding the information I have sent you and the further information I have yet to send.
Yours
Mrs Sheila Oliver
Stockport’s Freedom of Information Campaigner
