Team effort – Unlawful "Head H" bailiff fees for the attention of MoJ

[outlawla]

1 July 2015

 

ALLEGATIONS IN BRIEF

 

1 - .Allegation of Fraud, North East Lincolnshire Council and Rossendale's bailiffs.

 

BACKGROUND CIRCUMSTANCES LEADING TO THE COMPLAINT

 

Allegation 1 was subject of appeal by complainant Mr [outlawla] (appeal of outcome, local resolution), the appeal decision was made on 06 August 2014 with the outcome for the appropriate authority to contact complainant, agree an action plan and conduct a proportionate investigation with the complainant being updated appropriately.

 

INVESTIGATION DETAILS

 

E mail dated 17.04.2015 – DCI Killeen to recipient Mr [outlawla]

 

Thank you for your time yesterday, as discussed I have been appointed to review DS Wood’s management of your complaint in relation how the investigation was conducted.

 

I will undertake my review once we have agreed the terms of reference which I have detailed below;

 

• Allegations against North East Lincolnshire Council and the finding that there had been no criminal wrongdoing, you have requested that I review this area of the investigation conducted by DS Wood to ensure that all enquiries were conducted appropriately.
  

• Home Office Circular 47/2004, you have requested that I review the use of this circular as a correct means of justification for the decision not to investigate.
  

• In relation to supporting documentation sent by yourself you have requested that I review all such documentation was taken into account by DS Wood when considering the allegation of a criminal conspiracy between North East Lincolnshire Council and Rossendale’s bailiffs.
  

The above terms of reference was agreed by Mr [outlawla] by way of e mail response 20 April 2015.

 

ACCOUNTS

 

I have spoken with DS Wood and reviewed all documentation that was provided Mr [outlawla] and that which was created by way of the officers enquiries which predominately focussed on the schedule 5 Head C and Head H charges.

 

In relation to the terms of reference set:

 

I am satisfied with DS Wood's investigation and that it was conducted appropriately.

 

HO Circular 47/2004 – In this case DS Wood was satisfied that a criminal offence had not been committed therefore HO Circular 47/2004 is not triggered under these circumstances.

 

I have reviewed all documentation as requested.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Allegation 1 - Allegation of Fraud, North East Lincolnshire Council and Rossendale's bailiffs.

 

On the evidence available, based upon the balance of probabilities, this allegation is not upheld.

[EWHC1362]

The Spectator covered the subject of police corruption a couple of months ago.

 

(The shocking truth about police corruption in Britain)

 

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9461322/the-shocking-truth-about-police-corruption-in-britain/

[bazm]

Well done for wasting police time

[outlawla]

Well done for wasting police time

 

If you think there has been people's time wasted up to this point you are going to be in for a shock when the clowns (Chief Constable etc.) at Humberside Police have to answer to several years of time wasted in not pursuing real criminals in exchange for their obscene salaries.

[ploddertom]

Makes me wonder if there is still need to pursue this as the Head H fees no longer exist. Whilst there may still be a few outstanding cases most looking here now do not have a clue what it is all about. You seem to have moved on to a very different subject which if needs debating then should have a thread of its own.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

Yes the police have spent too much time chasing murderers, thieves, car criminals, assaulters, burglars and other violent criminals. How dare they not focus 100% of their resources on this subject. Hmmmm.

[outlawla]

Yes the police have spent too much time chasing murderers, thieves, car criminals, assaulters, burglars and other violent criminals. How dare they not focus 100% of their resources on this subject. Hmmmm.

 

That doesn't make much sense. Unless you are saying that the economic crime units within police forces also double up as specialists in chasing murderers, thieves, car criminals, assaulters, burglars and other violent criminals.

[Coughdrop]

Have to agree with Plodder here. This appears to be nothing to do with Head H fees. The case against NE Lincs seems to be over and done with. It's now 15 months since Head H fees disappeared, so one has to question the point of it being discussed here.

 

That said, I appreciate it's not for me to try to dictate what does and does not get posted here.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

That doesn't make much sense. Unless you are saying that the economic crime units within police forces also double up as specialists in chasing murderers, thieves, car criminals, assaulters, burglars and other violent criminals.

 

Lol, and you think they are not real police officers? I'm pretty sure if they have nothing to do, they will investigate whatever they are told to investigate as serving police officers. There are loads or real crimes connected to economics though, but this head H tosh just isn't one of them.

[outlawla]

Appealing Humberside police's Investigation into complaint about misconduct (post #201).

 

Appeal form

 

Supporting documents: One, Two, Three, Four, Five

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

Yay, way to go wasting resources.

[unclebulgaria67]

S=GrumpyToSayTheLeast;4768750]Yay, way to go wasting resources.

 

There is a serious point here about whether the Police can investigate an alleged fraud by a public body. From what i have read, they seem to have a problem and it has become more an issue about the complaints system, than the original issue.

 

The Police should have investigated it properly and passed a file to the CPS to advise on.

[brassnecked]

Yay, way to go wasting resources.

NELC, like Ynys Mon is one seriously corrupt council, and the police are sitting on their hands, the Vested interests are watching watch other's backs. Head H fee fraud was a serious issue.

[Bailiff Advice]

The way that I see it (and of course I could be wrong) is that if I suspected that I had been the victim of fraud then it would be for ME to make a complaint to the police and they would investigate the amount that had been charged to ME. However, I would not be able to ask them to investigate whether YOU or anyone else had been defrauded. In other words, it should be for each individual person to make their own complaint.

 

Coming back to this particular issue. The problem that you have here is PROVING that the charge was not a valid one and sadly, the position that we have is that whilst Outlawla considers that the Head H fee is unlawful....this has not been proved in court.

 

What Outlawla should have done is to ask the COURT to examine the 'Head H' fee under Detailed Assessment (as outlined in the statutory regulations).

 

Instead, what happened was that hundreds of Freedom of Information requests were made over a numbers of years to many local authorities trying to ascertain how many cases had been subject to a "Head H' fee. And yet.....the charge has never been subject to challenge in court.

[GrumpyToSayTheLeast]

This is my point. He is just wasting police time. He needs to find someone affected by this to make the complaint, or challenge it in court.

This way he has chosen to do it is purely down to the fact that it costs nothing and no risk of "losing". If he is adamant, then he should put his money where his mouth is instead of wasting taxpayers money using this course.

[ploddertom]

As this thread is going nowhere now & the chances of any Head H Fees to argue that are outstanding will be very small, then now is the time to close this. I have also taken the opportunity to remove the last 3 posts.