Full communication Ref Louise Connelly's involvement with Prince Alfred Court.

The request was partially successful.

Susan Anne Marie Stalsberg

Dear Liverpool City Council,

I am requesting the following information in my role as a director and a responsible person for the below multiple listed building:

PRINCE ALFRED COURT
27-35 PRINCE ALFRED RD
WAVERTREE
LIVERPOOL
L15 8HH

Please provide as a matter of high importance.
All communication between Louise Connelly/Harford ref the above building. To include:

1. All email communication starting from 2017 to current date.

2. All communication by letter from Louise Connelly or her team ref the above address.

3. All reports after any building inspection that Louise Connelly or her team took out on the above address.

4. All actions that were sanctioned following Louise Connelly's findings after her inspection of Prince Alfred Court by herself or anyone 'in her team'.

Please provide the more specific requested communication in relation to Prince Alfred Court between the following:

Louise Connelly & Tony Reeves.
Louise Connelly & Chris Lomas.
Louise Connelly & any member of staff within HSE.
Louise Connelly & any member of staff within MFAR.
Louise Connelly & any member of staff within Northwest Housing Services.
Louise Connelly & Prince Alfred Court (1992) Ltd.
Louise Connelly & Cllr Dave Cummings.

Thank you.

Yours faithfully,

Susie Stalsberg
Director of and on behalf of Prince Alfred Court (1992) Ltd

Liverpool City Council

 
Dear Marie Stalsberg
 
Please note: If your request was made via Whatdotheyknow.com there has
been a delay in these cases being forwarded to us. We aim to respond
within 20 working days of us receiving your request from
whatdotheyknow.com
 
Freedom of Information Act 2000
 
Thank you for your request for information that was received on 3 August
2022 concerning Dear Liverpool City Council,

I am requesting the following information in my role as a director and a
responsible person for the below multiple listed building:

PRINCE ALFRED COURT
27-35 PRINCE ALFRED RD
WAVERTREE
LIVERPOOL
L15 8HH

Please provide as a matter of high importance.
All communication between Louise Connelly/Harford ref the above building.
To include:

1. All email communication starting from 2017 to current date.

2. All communication by letter from Louise Connelly or her team ref the
above address.

3. All reports after any building inspection that Louise Connelly or her
team took out on the above address.

4. All actions that were sanctioned following Louise Connelly's findings
after her inspection of Prince Alfred Court by herself or anyone 'in her
team'.

Please provide the more specific requested communication in relation to
Prince Alfred Court between the following:

Louise Connelly & Tony Reeves.
Louise Connelly & Chris Lomas.
Louise Connelly & any member of staff within HSE.
Louise Connelly & any member of staff within MFAR.
Louise Connelly & any member of staff within Northwest Housing Services.
Louise Connelly & Prince Alfred Court (1992) Ltd.
Louise Connelly & Cllr Dave Cummings.

Thank you.

Yours faithfully,

Susie Stalsberg
Director of and on behalf of Prince Alfred Court (1992) Ltd...
 
We are dealing with your request under the Freedom of Information Act
2000 and we aim to send a response by 1 September 2022.
 
In some case, a fee may be payable. If we decide a fee is payable, we will
send you a fee notice and we will require you to pay the fee before
proceeding with your request.
 
The Freedom of Information Act 2000 may restrict the release of some or
all of the information you have requested. We will carry out an assessment
and if any exemptions apply to some or all of the information then we
might not provide that information to you. We will inform you if this is
the case and advise you of your rights to request an internal review and
to complain to the Information Commissioner's Office.
 
We will also advise you if we cannot provide you with the information
requested for any other reason together with the reason(s) why and details
of how you may appeal (if appropriate).
 
Yours sincerely,
 
Information Team
Liverpool City Council
 
NOTE: Please do not edit the subject line when replying to this email.
 
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.

Susan Anne Marie Stalsberg

Dear Liverpool City Council,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Liverpool City Council's handling of my FOI request 'Full communication Ref Louise Connelly's involvement with Prince Alfred Court.'.

[ GIVE DETAILS ABOUT YOUR COMPLAINT HERE ]

I've been advised that this FOI request should have been dealt with promptly by 1st September 2022.

Therefore I would like the information requested forwarded to me asap please.

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,

Susan Anne Marie Stalsberg

Liverpool City Council

══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

From: Liverpool City Council<[email address]>
To: [FOI #884057 email]

 
Dear Marie Stalsberg
 
 The service area from which the requested information is located have
contacted us to inform us that the request may take longer to process.
This is because some of the information is stored in archive .  May we
take this opportunity to apologise for the delay and any inconvenience
caused.
 
Yours sincerely,
 
Information Team
Liverpool City Council
 
NOTE: Please do not edit the subject line when replying to this email.
 
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.

Susan Anne Marie Stalsberg

Dear Liverpool City Council,

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

I'm writing to request an internal review of Liverpool City Council's handling of my FOI request 'Full communication Ref Louise Connelly's involvement with Prince Alfred Court.

Due to the serious subject matter requested in this FOI and given that they pertain to LCC's neglect of a LIFE THREATENING multiple listed building (which LCC are fully aware of) this continued dispicable attitude towards LCC's historic cover up of the Health & Safety breaches on our multiple listed building is not accepted post Grenfell.

The fact that the now ex CEO of LCC Tony Reeves refused to actually provide me with such vital information as quickly as humanly possible given that I'm a director of our dangerous building and insisted that I put in an FOI request to obtain this vital information is extreme negligence in itself. This is simply continued outrageous negligent behaviour from our local authority post Grenfell.

On behalf of the residents of Prince Alfred Court I do not accept LCC's excuses for this delay under such pressing circumstances and insist that all of the information requested in this FOI in relation to our dangerous building is now provided in full with no redactions as a matter of extreme urgency.

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,
Susan Anne Marie Stalsberg

Director of and on behalf of PAC (1992) Ltd

Paul Traynor left an annotation ()

This is Clearly a Discraceful response this clearly a building that has not been inspected properly by Connelly
Obviously LCC are failing in their Duty of Care
We are still in the era of the rolled-back state, the centre of the Council particularly the like housing, fire and building, has been hollowed out Inevitably, market forces and malpractices have filled the gap ?
Beyond left and right politics it is essential to bring the concept of the Council out of its long ideological eclipse and ask how can it act as a source of common good
Rather than patronising responses and getting the Building the remedial work it needs and proper certification

Information Requests, Liverpool City Council

3 Attachments

Dear Marie Stalsberg,

 

Please see attached a letter and accompanying documentation comprising the
internal review and associated response for the above referenced request.

 

Regards

 

Liverpool City Council

[1][email address]

[2][IMG]

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. https://liverpool.gov.uk/council/vision-...

Susan Anne Marie Stalsberg

Dear Information Requests

Your response and explanation for not providing the actual full report on our building and all communication relating to our multiple listed building is not accepted and just goes to prove that if this is the only information you hold on LCC's handling of our multiple building that was deemed potentially life threatening multiple times in a Fire Risk Assessment then it's crystal clear that Louise Connelly/LCC failed to investigate the causation of multiple linked corroded gas pipes all over the building resulting in countless gas leaks 3 of which occured in a common basement space that was deemed dangerous yet Louise Connelly failed to get to the botrom of what was causing all of these gas leaks, her findings were also totally dishonest regarding the true condition of the properties within the building and common area's in reports that I've actually seen despite LCC witholding these reports! Louise Connelly's only concern was regarding the leaseholders who did not have landord licenses as she was head of licensing at the time, she failed in her duty to expose the obvious Health & Safety breaches on our building and the influence she has with HSE prevented them from investigating fully this serious situation also. No authority insisted on getting to the bottom of the continuos gas pipe corrosion which resulted in so many seperate but linked gas leaks all over the building. Why?

LCC's explanation ref all of the officials in question are no longer working at the council is simply not true. Louise Connelly has been reinvented and now goes by the name Louise Harford and remains in LCC. The only person on my list that does'nt work at LCC is Tony Reeves who literally covered up for Louise Connelly's negligence for 3 years.

Where is the HHSRS that was supposedly taken out on our building and ALL properties housed iwithn our building? Why were the people responsible for our building at the time not held to account for the historic negligence and for literally endangering lives? Why did Louise Connnelly and her team fail to even contact Cadent and insist on studying the history of multiple linked gas leaks which have been proved to have been caused by years of continuous water ingress? Why did LCC instruct Merseyside Fire and Rescue not to come out to our building citing at the time it was a civil matter? As a mere leaseholder at the time I had to insist in 2019 that MFAR come out because LCC, Norrhwest Housing Services and the two ex directors of Prince Alfred Court were literally covering up the dangers specifically the numerous linked corroded gas pipes which continued to cause gas leaks in a multiple listed building post Grenfell. NWHS our now ex managing agents jumped ship as soon as the true dangers and appalling condition of our building were exposed. Why did Louise Connelly walk away from our building in 2019 without insisting on a FRA considering the true dangerous state of the building?

If I had not personally taken over from the inept and dishonest ex directors along with another new director and replaced numerous corroded gas pipes that were already leaking the likelyhood of a major gas explosion was very real. What have LCC learned from the documented inaction of Greenwhich Council ref the preventable Grenfell tragedy?

LCC should be answering these questions and providing all information but instead the COVER UP continues. This is negligence in the extreme and I will be taking all of our evidence to date to Michael Gove MP whom I have already contacted and the ICO.

LCC have not only been negligent but have actively covered up for all of the individuals involved.

PLEASE NOTE
This is strictly written without prejudice and must not be refaired to in law without the permission of it's author.

Yours Sincerely
Susie Stalsberg

Director of Prince Alfred Court (1992) Ltd

Paul Traynor left an annotation ()

problems associated with Liverpool City Council (LCC) is the sheer number and scale of the unanswered questions From FOI requests which are outstanding, concerning how it has been conducted over the last ten years for Citizens and Council Tax Payer's have been treated with disdain and Contempt when only getting partial answers or the Request asking for a internal Review meaning we have to Send Complaint to the ICO
Mayor Anderson when entering office with a mandate to be open and transparent clearly hasn't been the Case

Regards Paul Traynor

Susan Anne Marie Stalsberg left an annotation ()

Exactly Paul. The overall handling of FOI's in general s disgraceful however in my particular case this pertains to the COVER UP and total inaction of a dangerous multiple listed building post Grenfell.

I'm appalled how LCC have continued to literally cover up the inaction and dishonest findings of our dangerous building by an already convicted criminal with a staggering dishonest history within Liverpool City Council. This person has recently been reinvented within the council aa a result of her well documented credibility and the level of complaints (I personally know of 4) that have been raised/lodged officially with LCC and disturbingly the Commissioners.

Michael Gove MP is the only person I trust to investigate this serious situation going forward.

Paul Traynor left an annotation ()

Dear Liverpool Council,

You did not confirm or deny if Liverpool City Council holds information relevant to Ms Stalsberg request nor did you advise you are doing a internal Review either ( partially Successful ) i
see no information in your reply that matches Ms Stalsberg requests, please confirm or deny if you hold a records or files that matches the original FOI request ,Please provide said records as requested by Ms Stalsberg .

Paul Traynor left an annotation ()

Dear Liverpool city council

You did not confirm or deny if LCC holds information relevant to Ms Stalsberg request nor did I see
see no information in the report that matches this request,
(partially Successful) please confirm or deny if you hold a record or files that matches this description. Please provide said records or files that Ms Stalsberg requested, not an abridged version.

Mr T Clarke left an annotation ()

Dear Liverpool City Council,

It’s interesting to note your answer to question 2 of this FOI.

The answer to question 1 has no relevance to question 2, which asks “what is the official action taken if a senior member of LCC in a position of trust…”, and as such must be classed as a ‘refusal to answer’.

But what’s even more interesting about your reply to question 2 is that your legal department have failed in their obligations under the FOI Act, “Refusing a request: writing a refusal notice…to provide the requester with that information.”

The FOI Act also states:

“The refusal notice will need to state the section of FOIA being relied upon and in most instances explain the reasons for its decision, including the details of any public interest and prejudice tests.”

ICO please take note.

LCC, would you like to comment?

Mr T Clarke left an annotation ()

Please ignore my previous annotation…wrong FOI request.