Illegal practice of No Address in family courts to proceed without opposition.

Dear Northamptonshire County Council,

Several cases of Northamptonshire County Council seeking directions
or orders in family courts falsely claiming that No Address is
known for the other parties in the case despite clear evidence that
this is untrue have come to my attention.

Please provide to me figures for the period from January 2004 to
March 2010 showing the number of directions or other hearings in
family courts where other parties were said to be not contactable
i.e.(No Address) and the percentage of hearings that this
represents or the total number of relevant hearings during that
period.

Please also provide the total number of non contested hearings in
family courts for the same period where the authority have been
allowed to obtain orders or directions without opposition as cases
of notifications not reaching other parties also appear to be
common.

Evidence in my possession shows that like many authorities
Northamptonshire County Council use this illegal policy to enter
family courts to gain non defended orders.

Yours faithfully,

Mr L Cannell

Dear Freedom of Information,

In response to your reply whilst I see the work involved in your
breakdown as always has been vastly inflated by yourselves, whilst
not wishing to state the obvious please consider the following and
provide figures requested for the period January 2009 to December
2009 inclusive according to your figures approximately 216 cases.

Only the Orders from the applications and orders section are
required to identify these figures and the information should be on
the very top of page one e.g.

Upon hearing the solicitors for the Local Authority and for the
child.
And upon the Respondent/s not attending
And upon the court deciding to proceed notwithstanding the lack of
service upon the respondents.

An average of 59 Pages per case including applications not needed
at 12 pages per minute should be less if the respondents are heard
it says so at the top of page one of the orders, that is 5 minutes
per case multiplied by 216 cases equal to 18 hours being generous.

Please accept this as a new request if necessary.

Several cases of Northamptonshire County Council seeking directions
or orders in family courts falsely claiming that No Address is
known for the other parties in the case despite clear evidence that
this is untrue have come to my attention.

Please provide to me figures for the period from January 2009 to
December 2009 showing the number of directions or other hearings in
family courts where other parties were said to be not contactable
i.e.(No Address) and the percentage of hearings that this
represents or the total number of relevant hearings during that
period.

Please also provide the total number of non contested hearings in
family courts for the same period where the authority have been
allowed to obtain orders or directions without opposition as cases
of notifications not reaching other parties also appear to be
common.

Evidence in my possession shows that like many authorities
Northamptonshire County Council use this illegal policy to enter
family courts to gain non defended orders.

Yours sincerely,

Louis Cannell

Dear Northamptonshire County Council,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of
Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Northamptonshire
County Council's handling of my FOI request 'Illegal practice of No
Address in family courts to proceed without opposition.'.

In order to cover up the illegal practices for example perjury used
by NCC to obtain illegal non defended orders the amount of work has
been falsely complicated. all the necessary information is located
at the top of the court orders as described below.

:-----------------------------------------------------
Only the Orders from the applications and orders section are
required to identify these figures and the information should be on
the very top of page one e.g.

Upon hearing the solicitors for the Local Authority and for the
child.
And upon the Respondent/s not attending And upon the court deciding
to proceed notwithstanding the lack of service upon the
respondents.

An average of 59 Pages per case including applications not needed
at 12 pages per minute should be less if the respondents are heard
it says so at the top of page one of the orders, that is 5 minutes
per case multiplied by 216 cases equal to 18 hours being generous.

:-----------------------------------------------------
Falsely claiming the amount of work involved is greater
than it actually is to hide your authorities criminal practices is
another dishonest ploy to cover your authorities criminal
activities.

Also waiting the full 20 working days to answer each request is
nothing more than a delaying tactic to hide your authorities guilt
in such matters!

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is
available on the Internet at this address:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/il...

Yours faithfully,

Louis Cannell

Dear Paul Edwards,

Thank you for your reply to my request for an internal review in
your reply you state "Chantelle disagrees with the applicant's
views on where the information is contained." If you require
evidence of this, we can obtain copies or have Chantelle show you
the sort of information she would need to look through if you wish.

I would like evidence of this provided as I still contest that the
information must be recorded on the orders themselves probably page
one as I have previously stated, and the number of orders per case
being fairly small.

Therefore I am completely dissatisfied with your response and
excuses to withhold this information to hide your authorities
criminal activities!

Yours sincerely,

Louis Cannell