Unaccountable Brent
Brent Council dismiss my complaints against identified Council employees merely as 'historical matters'
23rd August 2008 « Corrupt Council
Revised: 10-7-09
Documents from Brent Council are quoted here either whole or in part to establish context.
These employees are accountable
This feeble response from an Arnold Meagher, describing himself as Brent Council's 'principal lawyer', was dated 8-7-2008. Meagher declares, pompously, 'the Council will not re-investigate your historical complaints or reply to the content of your letter of 12 June 2008' (see Hammering on the Hovel of Hades Revolting Brent).
The events described throughout Bent Council point to serious deficiencies in the Council's response to my complaints of nuisance from a neighbour identified here as nfh.
Compelling evidence of deliberate dishonesty and deception by identified Council employees has surfaced in Brent Council's response to the Ombudsman's two investigations of my complaints against the Council and is documented throughout Bent Council.
The Council employee Oladipo Koleoso
I had complained to the Council about a neighbour causing nuisance and told the 'housing officer' Koleoso I could meet him only on Friday afternoons because of commitments at work. He failed to keep three separate appointments for Friday afternoons. Then, in a letter dated Thursday 1-11-2001, he claimed he was visiting me on the following day, Friday 2-11-2001. Naturally, I didn't receive this letter in time to alert me to his proposed visit (see The Council's refusal to act Soiling my windows).
This can be interpreted only as a refusal by the Council employee Koleoso to meet me to discuss these complaints. Precisely why Koleoso should behave in this manner is unknown and I have not yet received an apology from the Council.
The Council employee Catherine Dack
Failing to get the Council to meet me to discuss these complaints, I submitted a complaint against the Council to the Ombudsman in summer 2002. An element of this complaint related to the unacceptable behaviour of the Council employee Koleoso. The Council's replies to the Ombudsman were presented by the Council employee Catherine (Kate) Dack, describing herself as 'complaints officer'.
Dack told the Ombudsman that- the letter dated 1-11-2001 from Mr Koleoso states that further to a telephone call this afternoon he will call to see Mr Leamy tomorrow
This letter does not refer to a telephone call, and I did not phone or speak to anyone at Brent Council on this date. This lie appears to be a blatant attempt by the Council to disguise the refusal of Koleoso to meet me in 2001 (see The Council mislead the Ombudsman Soiling my windows).
Dack also told the Ombudsman that- Koleoso had visited my address on a number of occasions between October and November 2001
I have seen no evidence he had visited my address either on 2-11-2001 or on any day on which he had said he would visit. This also is an attempt to disguise the refusal of Koleoso to meet me.
I have not yet received an apology from the Council for Dack’s deliberate lies to the Ombudsman's questions. Today, Dack is employed as 'repair complaints and disrepair manager' by Brent Council.
The Council employee Helen Evans
Because of the failure of the Ombudsman's investigation in 2002, and with the issues which gave rise to it unresolved, I submitted another complaint to the Ombudsman in 2005. The Council’s replies were presented by the council employee Helen Evans, describing herself as 'managing director' the Council's 'housing service, aka 'brent housing partnership'.
Evans told the Ombudsman that- the Council had no evidence of nuisance caused by use of laundry equipment by this neighbour
Evans failed to tell the Ombudsman that
- the Council had been in possession from 20-1-2004 of an almost 4-month section of my diary recording inconsiderate use of laundry equipment by this neighbour
- that the Council's 'neighbour relations team' failed to ask for a copy of this diary
- the Council employee Olga H(abana?) had visited my address on 14-1-2004
- that H(abana?) had been told on 14-1-2004 about the assault on me by this neighbour
I have yet to receive an apology from the Council for Evans’ dishonest replies to the Ombudsman's questions.
Let there be no misunderstanding
The Ombudsman's investigations of 2002/3 and 2005/6 failed because the dishonesty of both Dack and Evans deliberately hid from the Ombudsman the Council's knowledge of the harassment of me by this neighbour. The misinformation supplied deliberately by Evans was used, also, as a means to disguise from the Ombudsman the unsuitability of this particular leasehold agreement.
This manipulation of the Ombudsman was intentional, and shows that the Council were following an agenda other than that which the Ombudsman had been given to believe.
- the Ombudsman's failure to address the issues regarding my complaints against the Council
- the escape from sanction by the Council employee Koleoso
- the escape from sanction by the Council employee Dack
- the continuation of the Council's inappropriate leaseholder agreement with nfh
The Office of the Commission for Local Administration in England was established by Parliament, with the Ombudsman appointed by Her Majesty The Queen.The Council employees identified above have
- shown contempt for me as the Council's tenant
- shown contempt for the Ombudsman's Office
- shown contempt for the wishes of Parliament
- shown contempt for the wishes of Her Majesty The Queen
There appear to be many problems within Brent Council's 'housing service', problems it appears the Council is determined to ignore. The Council's 'chief executive', Gareth Daniel, needs to understand he has many problems to resolve when considering the issues outlined in Bent Council—and changing the borough’s name is not a practical way to address them (see …while nero fiddled). Brent Council behaves as though is has no soul to be damned, and no body to be kicked.
Brent Council have attempted to remove my comments regarding the unacceptable behaviour of identified Council employees from this website. These are not false allegations, and I will pursue them until they are addressed adequately and I am satisfied I have been treated fairly.
'Historical matters' — BUNK!
This thread is continued in Arrogant Brent.
Related posts
Battling Brent Bloody Brent Revolting Brent Incompetent Brent The 'neighbour relations team' Uncaring Brent An open letter to Brent Council … while Nero fiddled Coote and Longdon Rogue's Gallery Hell twice over Arrogant Brent Why did Dack lie? Evans is dishonest, Part 1 Capitulating Brent? Bent Brent
BC copyright © 2008 WPL · Hysterical · Bent Council
