Dear Ministry of Defence,

Mr H Lederman a Judge of the First-tier Tribunal dated 12 August 2018 made some very critical comments in his Coda at 112. about Veterans UK.
His criticism was profound. He remarked inter alia:-

"It is a poor reflection on Veterans UK who are responsible for compiling the Response and inhibits the efficient administration of justice in these appeals.
...this case has been one of the most disorganised and illogically compiled the Tribunal Judge has considered for many years.
The level of disorganisation lengthened the hearing time preparation and inhibited the understanding of litigant in person".

Please advise if Veterans UK has been asked to provide an explanation for their lamentable service and, if they have been asked, where their written explanation can be located in the form of an exculpatory narrative.

Mark Gent

Yours faithfully,

Mark Gent

CHARLES SPENCER left an annotation ()

I had a Tribunal by the Armed Forces Chamber of HM Courts & Tribunal Services, the case being ENT/00099/2018 in LEEDS, in which it was nothing but a Kangaroo Court. 565 mostly double sided A4 documents, case done in less in than 15 minutes. Panel of a Judge, Doctor, either a severing or ex service person said I had not got PTSD even through counties top specialists stated I had, even had to under take a MRI scan etc. Panel all parroting same words, I not got PTSD but the next best thing, when asked what is it in their head, they refused to answer. Doctor then said MR Spencer , you do not have PTSD, you are not suicidal. On the elements provided by VETERANS UK , it mostly all MALICIOUS FALSEHOODS quoted by them , and total failure by them to provide the evidence which was requested from them. The case center mostly from serving on HMS Coventry in 1979 when as a whistle blower I did my DUTY of CARE in outing a OFFICER trying to blackmail young under 18 ratings against their will into sex, or he would destroy their career. I dismissed from the ship etc. A few years later same officer, now in charge of HMS Nottingham attacked a rating for sex off the Falkland Island, and he resigned his Commission, the MOD/RN never doing its JOB of protecting the RATINGS in the MOD. MOD need to explain to the people why he was NEVER CHARGED in LAW , has he was know to be a HOMOSEXUAL PREDATOR on HMS Pellew, HMS Coventry and HMS Nottingham. Clearly the MOD protects CORRUPT OFFICERS.

People-Sec-FOI Mailbox (MULTIUSER), Ministry of Defence

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Gent,

 

Thank you for your email requesting information under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.

 

Please see the attached response.

 

Kind regards,

 

Defence People Secretariat

Dear People-Sec-FOI Mailbox (MULTIUSER),
Thank you for your reply.
I can well understand the difficulty you will have encountered in dealing with the inefficient Armed Forces Tribunal system. It is quite parlous.
The details you require are.

WPAFCC ENT/00281 dated 5 June 2018.

Yours sincerely,

Mark Gent

CHARLES SPENCER left an annotation ()

The comments made by Judge Lederman on 12 August 2018, most likely in his written conclusion of the case .

correspondence@mod.ecase.gsi.gov.uk on behalf of Defence Business Services Secretariat, Ministry of Defence

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Gent,

Please find attached our response to your recent enquiry.

Regards

DBS Secretariat

Dear Ministry of Defence,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Ministry of Defence's handling of my FOI request 'First Tier Tribunal'.

[ GIVE DETAILS ABOUT YOUR COMPLAINT HERE ]

Failure to reply

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

Yours faithfully,

Mark Gent

CIO-FOI-IR (MULTIUSER), Ministry of Defence

Dear Mr Gent,

 

Receipt is acknowledged of your email of 12 January 2020 in which you
requested an internal review of a response under FOIA on behalf of the
Ministry of Defence (reference above).

 

The Department's target for completing internal reviews is 20 working days
and we therefore aim to complete the review and respond to you by 10
February 2020. While we are working hard to achieve this, in the interests
of providing you with a more realistic indication of when you should
expect a response, we should advise that the majority are currently taking
between 20 and 40 working days to complete. The internal review that will
involve a full, independent reconsideration of the handling of the RFI as
well as the final decision.

 

As MOD has been unable to identify any relevant recorded data under the
references or dates that you have quoted, it would assist this
investigation if you would kindly send us a copy of the document you have
quoted in your request.  It is not understood by the Compliance Team what
is Mr Justice Lederman’s “Coda at 112” exactly?    You are welcome to send
this document to us directly if you do not wish to place it in the public
domain.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

MOD Information Rights Compliance Team

 

CIO-FOI-IR (MULTIUSER), Ministry of Defence

1 Attachment

  • Attachment

    20200114 Rev Mr Gent FTT Pensions Tribunal judgement reference to Vets UK Rev response.pdf

    101K Download View as HTML

PSA

 

MOD Information Rights Compliance Team