Dear Liverpool City Council,
To - Tony Reeves, Chief Executive
Jeanette McLoughlin, City Solicitor & Monitoring Officer is trying to block a number of freedom of information requests.
Can your office please supply the following requests
Councilor Joe Hanson - Councilor Lisa Gaughan - Councilor Malcolm Kennedy - Kirkdale & Vauxhall ward.
Please ask Councilor Joe Hanson, to supply all the developers names that Cllr Hanson has worked for and with, as a paid consultant at the same time not informing the Liverpool city council of his actives.
2- Did both Councilor's Lisa Gaughan & Malcolm Kennedy know of his actives if so, why did these pair cover this up?
3- Will Cllr. Hanson state to his involvement in the Metalworks failed site - on Vauxhall Road Liverpool - and as to the new number of investors from Metalworks who have come forward to try to find the developers from this site and 2 others in Vauxhall Liverpool, they spent months trying to reach these three councilors and even wrote to the Liverpool city council and the Mayor’s office without (one reply) even the Liverpool echo would not help these buyers, one buyer was told ‘Cllr Kennedy’ spends most of his time in Spain with his new partner?
4- Will Cllr Hanson and Cllr Kennedy state as to any relationship or involvement with (174 Law solicitors) who are behind the failed site known as “The Metalworks” in Vauxhall Rd?
What action has the Liverpool city Council taken over Cllr Joe Hanson’s deeply insulting behavior and witness intimidation, having asked several developers to sue a member of the public for asking questions he did not like.
Councillor Hanson then went on to call several developers to scare her off due to the number of FOI’s this person had been sending to the LCC.
Jeanette McLoughlin also called this lady a pest and would not reply to most of her FOI.s
Save this city from corruption within the Cunard building group
Mr. Matt Williams
Dear Matt Williams
With regard to the content of your submission, this comprises speculation,
comment and expression of opinion in relation to individuals and seeks
comment from individuals as opposed to information held by a public
authority, for which purpose Freedom of Information legislation exists.
This submission is therefore rejected in its entirety and is not a valid
request for information.
In relation to the comments and speculation you make relating to
Warning - Submission of Information Requests with potentially Defamatory
It is our assessment that the content of your statements within your
request are in whole or part potentially defamatory in nature, that these
identify or refer to individuals and are being published by yourself
through the use of a public website forum to third parties.
We would further advise you that the defamatory statements made by
yourself either directly or through recognised aliases and contained
within the information requests referenced above fall within the meaning
of Article 14(1)(a) of the E-Commerce Directive (2000/31/EC). Under the
law of England and Wales, a defamatory statement is one which tends to
lower the claimant in the estimation of right thinking members of society
generally (Sim v Stretch  2 All ER 1237).
We would further advise that a defamatory statement is published at the
place where it is read, heard or seen, and is not where the material was
first placed on the internet. In internet cases, therefore, provided a
small number of people have access to the material on the internet in
England, the English courts will have jurisdiction to hear the claim
against a foreign defendant (Spiliada Maritime Corp v Cansulex Ltd 
We would therefore advise that you take prompt action to remove or
disabled access to the Offending Webpages.
In the event that this confirmation is not received, the individuals named
directly or by implication within the above referenced information
requests and publicly displayed on the Offending Websites shall reserve
the right to issue proceedings against you seeking relief for defamation.
The remedies that may be available to the these individuals include an
injunction restraining further publication of the Offending Statement
[pending trial], damages, legal costs and interest.
LIVERPOOL CITY COUNCIL DISCLAIMER
This email contains proprietary confidential information some or all of
which may be legally privileged and/or subject to the provisions of
privacy legislation. It is intended solely for the addressee.
If you are not the intended recipient, an addressing or transmission error
has misdirected this e-mail; you must not use, disclose, copy, print or
disseminate the information contained within this e-mail. Please notify
the author immediately by replying to this email.
Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states these to be the views of
Liverpool City Council.
This email has been scanned for all viruses and all reasonable precautions
have been taken to ensure that no viruses are present. Liverpool City
Council cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising from
the use of this email or attachments.
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