Dangerous Carbon Monoxide Emission Investigation
re: Rick Brunt, Head of Operations Directorate (North West Field Operations), Health & Safety Executive.
On 17 December 2012, Rick Brunt made the following statement in an email message which arbitrarily denies investigation of issues not addressed by Tanya Stewart, HM Principal Inspector, Health & Safety Executive, North West Field Operations, Bootle, Merseyside. Brunt claimed that: "HSE has investigated your concerns about gas safety and we have, as you know, concluded our investigation of your original complaint. We found no area of concern, nor any matters that required enforcement action. As no new information has been provided our conclusions remain unchanged and this matter remains closed".
Brunt has not provided a reasoned response to many outstanding issues; instead, he has made an inadmissible general denial regarding investigation of a dangerous gas condition over approximately two years. The term "general denial" defines arbitrary and biased statements, innuendo, and assumption that bear no relation to facts.
HSE must controvert all the declarations and assertions as common law requires and not use a narrow construction when legal precedents generally require a liberal construction, at least until a judge rules otherwise. HSE must present a legal argument based upon fact if it wishes to deny the substantiated assertions in complaints and must provide access to records.
A general denial, in its legal sense, classifies as proscribed behavior. Most courts will not accept a general denial nor should any properly convened investigating panel admit it into evidence. HSE managers and employees continue to frustrate filing of complaints by repeatedly orchestrating unlawful merry-go-rounds to evade responsibility to investigate illegal gas appliance installations not fit for purpose.
Employee information about public sector employees classifies as public information and HSE must make copies available upon request. If the HSE denies a document request, then it must identify the document and state the particular exemption and statutory reference that applies and give legitimate reasons for the refusal or redaction. The law does not allow a general denial without substantiation with a legal precedent.
Brunt's assertion requires substantiation so that impending civil and/or criminal action can proceed against Sands, Stewart and Brunt who, as public officers, have allegedly, jointly and severally, committed gross misconduct as public officers since the filing of complaints with Chester & Districty Housing Trust (30 Mar 11) and HSE (20 Jun 11) about dangerous carbon monoxide and other noxious emissions in a Trust property.
Precedents show definitions of a public officer as one who holds an office of trust concerning the public, especially if attended with profit by whomever and in whatever way the officer accepted appointment. The person concerned need not hold an office in a narrow or technical sense. Relevance rests in the nature of the duties and the level of public trust involved rather than the manner or nature of appointment. Public office holders discharge any duty in which the public has an interest especially if they receive a salary or other payment funded by the public and have an obligation to perform a public duty. Remuneration ranks as a significant factor but not an essential element.
Tanya Stewart, HM Principal Inspector, Health & Safety Executive, North West Field Operations, Bootle, Merseyside has allegedly committed gross misconduct as a public officer. Instead of responding with particularity to serious Health and Safety gas issues, Stewart orchestrated a stonewalling campaign (30 Jan 12) then started another self-serving merry-go-round (13 Dec 12). Her gross misconduct for almost eleven months allegedly qualifies her and her supervisor for indictment under common law for misconduct in public office. Misuse of public office can arise both as a result of actions taken and failing to act.
Freedom of Information request:
1. Copies of all documents that relate to the statement by Brunt (17 Dec 12).
2. Copies of all documents that relate to the investigation that Stewart claims to have completed. That package should include: all chronologies; transcripts of interviews with complainant; interviews by HSE personnel with records of those interviews containing full names, titles, and employment of interviewees; detail regarding the overall investigation of the complaint; transcripts of telephone conversations with Chester & District Housing Trust and National Grid Gas employees in a consort with Sands.
3. Salary band documents and job descriptions for Brunt, Stewart and Sands together with their Full First Names/MIddle Initials/Last Names/Dates of Employment by HSE and job titles and descriptions.
4. Copies of all correspondence and email messages sent to the three named HSE parties by the Complainant and their responses to those communications.
5. All documents in response to this request should be submitted in PDF format and be sent as email attachments.
Paul Trummel
PhD (RPI ABD), PhD (UW ABD), MS (RPI), MSc (UK), BSc (UK), FISTD, FIOP
Professor Emeritus, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
CONTRA CABAL FOUNDATION LIMITED
A Private Limited Company Incorporated under the Companies Act 2006
Registrar of Companies England/Wales #7290470
Technical and Graphic Communication and Investigative Journalism
UK equivalencies in graphic communication recognized by Boston University, Northeastern University, Rochester Institute of Technology, Fitchburg State College, San Jose State University, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and University of Washington with comparability twice certified by International Education Research Foundation (IERF), a credential evaluation service accredited by US Department of Education.
Fellow, International Society of Typographic Designers
Fellow, Institute of Paper Printing and Publishing
International Federation of Journalists, Brussels, International Press Card #GB 8953.
National Union of Journalists, London, Press Card #025057.
Society of Authors, London - #00039806.
Suez Canal Zone General Service Medal - 1950-1955.
FOI Request Supplement - 880-37-15
Paul Trummel, Professor Emeritus (20 Dec 12)
http://contracabal.com/880-37-15.html
FOI Request for all records that support the following statement by Stephen James Mosley MP (insofar as his statement relates to HSE) predicated upon the cited HSE investigation regulations.
Stephen James Mosley MP sent the following statement (backdated to 04 Apr 12) to the Tenant (the responsible party) on a House of Commons letter heading:
"I have spoken to CDHT today and understand from them that your complaint with them has been taken through to Stage 2 in their complaints procedure involving a hearing which you did not attend. They have also been investigated by their regulators, the Tenants Services Authority and by the Health and Safety Executive who found no evidence of non-compliance on behalf of the Trust."
The statement by Mosley "Health and Safety Executive [who] found no evidence of non-compliance" presupposes that Tanya Stewart followed all HSE investigation procedures described at:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/foi/internalops/og...
Procedure Overview
An overview of the procedure is provided in the attached flowchart at
http://www.hse.gov.uk/foi/internalops/og...
Monitoring
Line managers should ensure, via normal management activity, that those involved in operating this procedure carry out their responsibilities in line with the standards and time scales described.
They should carry out:
sufficient documented checks to satisfy themselves, and to prove to any
subsequent audits, that the procedure is being operated correctly; and,
data quality checks of COIN at provider group level, as required in this procedure.
Please find attached information as requested under the FOI Act, your
request reference: What Do They Know 141574
Rick Brunt | Head of Operations | Field Operations Directorate
Health & Safety Executive | Redgrave Court, Merton Road, Bootle, L20 7HS
|(: +44(0) 151 951 4712 (VPN 523) | È : +44(0) 7879 661662 | 7: +44(0) 151
951 4835 (fax)
| *: [1][email address] | :: [2]http://www.hse.gov.uk/
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.
References
Visible links
1. mailto:.[email address]
mailto:[email address]
blocked::blocked::mailto:[email address]
mailto:.[email address]
2. http://www.hse.gov.uk/
http://www.hse.gov.uk/
Please find attached information as requested under the FOI Act, your
request reference: What Do They Know 141574
Rick Brunt | Head of Operations | Field Operations Directorate
Health & Safety Executive | Redgrave Court, Merton Road, Bootle, L20 7HS
|(: +44(0) 151 951 4712 (VPN 523) | È : +44(0) 7879 661662 | 7: +44(0) 151
951 4835 (fax)
| *: [1][email address] | :: [2]http://www.hse.gov.uk/
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.
References
Visible links
1. mailto:.[email address]
mailto:[email address]
blocked::blocked::mailto:[email address]
mailto:.[email address]
2. http://www.hse.gov.uk/
http://www.hse.gov.uk/
Health and Safety Executive.
I am writing to request an internal review of Health and Safety Executive's handling of my FOI request 'External Flue and Chimney Design System'.
Deliberate obfuscation with intent to deny due process of law by Geoffrey Podger and Rick Brunt, Health and Safety Executive.
See
http://contracabal.com/880-37-15.html
For updated information
A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/da...
Yours faithfully,
Paul Trummel
Dear Professor Trummel
Freedom of Information Review Reference No: 2013020254
Original Request Reference No: 2013010884
Thank you for your request for an internal review regarding Information
not held by HSE
It was received on 15 February 2013 and we are dealing with it under the
HSE internal review procedure in accordance with the terms of the Freedom
of Information Act 2000
We hope to let you know the outcome of the review as quickly as possible.
In most cases within 40 working days.
Please contact me if you have any queries about this acknowledgement. It
would be helpful if you could quote the reference number in any future
communications..
Yours sincerely
Richard Hands
FOI Unit
Health and Safety Executive
1.G Redgrave Court
Merton Road
Bootle
Merseyside
L20 7HS
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.
Dear Professor Trummel
Freedom of Information Review Reference No: 2013020257
Original Request Reference No: 2013010883
Thank you for your request for an internal review regarding: Information
relating to HSE Staff
It was received on 15 February 2013 and we are dealing with it under the
HSE internal review procedure in accordance with the terms of the Freedom
of Information Act 2000
We hope to let you know the outcome of the review as quickly as possible.
In most cases within 40 working days.
Please contact me if you have any queries about this acknowledgement. It
would be helpful if you could quote the reference number in any future
communications.
Yours sincerely
Richard Hands
FOI Unit
Health and Safety Executive
1.G Redgrave Court
Merton Road
Bootle
Merseyside
L20 7HS
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.
To: Judith Hackitt CBE, Health & Safety Executive, Board Chair
Evidently this referral to Richard Hands amounts to nothing more than another disingenuous response and further perversion of the course of justice by adding another 40 working days to an existing request using a proxy who cannot be identified on the HSE web site as an FOIA public sector officer.
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:03:49 +0000
To: Geoffrey Podger <[email address]>
From: Paul Trummel <[email address]>
Subject: SECOND REQUEST: FOI/DPA Requests - 880-37-15
Cc:
David Gartside <[email address]>,
Frances Outram <[email address]>,
Howard Shiplee <[email address]>,
Hugh Robertson <[email address]>,
Isobel Garner <[email address]>,
Judith Hackitt <[email address]>,
Nick Baldwin <[email address]>,
Paul Kenny <[email address]>,
Richard Taylor <[email address]>,
Robin Dahlberg <[email address]>,
Sarah Veale <[email address]>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 06:29:46 +0000
To: Geoffrey Podger <[email address]>
From: Paul Trummel <[email address]>
Subject: FOI/DPA Requests - 880-37-15
Cc: Deborah Hart <[email address]>, Richard Hands <[email address]>
Geoffrey Podger, Chief Executive Officer, HSE
Please verify that:
Richard Hands
FOI Unit
Health and Safety Executive
1.G Redgrave Court
Merton Road
Bootle
Merseyside
L20 7HS
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ex...
has the qualifications and experience to act as an FOIA/DPA Officer and validate that fact with documentation. Also provide documentation that shows that HSE has an FOI unit and furnish the names of all members of that unit with full names, middle initials, last names, titles, job descriptions and pay bands.
Paul Trummel, Professor Emeritus.
FAO - Paul Trummel
Please see the attached response to your request for an internal review.
Jane Cloherty
FOI Policy Advisor
1.G
Redgrave Court
Bootle
VPN 523 4164
Fax 0151 951 3274
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.
FAO - Paul Trummel
Please see the attached response to your request for an internal review.
Jane Cloherty
FOI Policy Advisor
1.G
Redgrave Court
Bootle
VPN 523 4164
Fax 0151 951 3274
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.
Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 07:41:50 +0200
To: Noel Mullarkey
From: Paul Trummel
Subject: Fwd: ICO - Internal Review Management [Ref. FS50491122] - 880-37-15
Noel Mullarkey.
The final notice 07. PT-13-0513-1107.pdf made it quite clear that the issues related to the ICO response [Ref. FS50491122] were now closed and that I would only accept letters to the Editor.
HSE has ignored that statement and again tried to adulterate procedures by sending the attached five emails/letters. I consider them as another attempt at retroactive preemption and have ignored the content. It is up to ICO what they do with them.
I have no intent to retroactively enter correspondence into current evidence. I see this as another disingenuous act of bureaucratic sabotage and barratry.
Barratry: (law) vexatiously persisting in inciting lawsuits and quarrels.
Retroactiive Preemption: an unlawful and disingenuous time-warp stratagem designed to corrupt evidence and documents that the parties should have exchanged during the disclosure process.
All HSE correspondence and actions since 09 May 13 fall into that category.
Inadmissible in the current analysis and sent to OCE separately.
JC-13-0515-0001.pdf
JC-13-0515-0002.pdf
JC-13-0515-0003.pdf
JC-13-0515-0004.pdf
JC-13-0515-0005.pdf
Paul Trummel, Professor Emeritus.
We work to defend the right to FOI for everyone
Help us protect your right to hold public authorities to account. Donate and support our work.
Donate Now