Upcoming Trial date/help with Schedule of loss..

[renegadeimp]

You say you dont believe the police cos of some weird conspiracy theory. Do you have proof of what you are accusing?

[dawnporter]

I did state clearly that.....ombudsman's investigation into the housing association says in writing " The person who opened her door, claims police and social worker told him they had a POLICE warrant"....When police where asked they stated :"We had nothing to do with her taking out a warrant."

 

If the police show up at your door..social worker in tow, your suddenly opened from the outside. You are a woman and alone, then a person informs you that you are being section under the MHA, you are transported in a police car to the hospital. Police then deny they had any part in your section, what would be your thought process pertaining to the police?

[dawnporter]

Btw you look up some caselaws pertaining to the MHA and police, this is not the first time they have been called out for misusing thier powers under this Act.

 

Wether you call it conspiracy or whatever, fact is Police are using MH system in this Country to harrass citizens who have done nothing criminal.

 

And yes i have proof of the police harrassment this person has suffered.

[fletch70]

From what I read the police are saying that they had no input in obtaining the warrant but they did not say there were not involved in the execution of the warrant .

 

Obviously I can not comment on the particular case as the details are sketchy and with all due respect probably not complete.

 

You do not have to do anything criminal for the police to get involved. For example suicide is not a crime but I think we would all hope that the police would get involved if they seriously though there was a substantial risk of such. Similarly thoughts are not illegal and no crime has been committed until it has happened so where do you draw the line

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Btw you look up some caselaws pertaining to the MHA and police, this is not the first time they have been called out for misusing thier powers under this Act.

 

Wether you call it conspiracy or whatever, fact is Police are using MH system in this Country to harrass citizens who have done nothing criminal.

 

And yes i have proof of the police harrassment this person has suffered.

 

 

The police can only act if an order has been made and must act if requested to do so.

I is those applying for such orders who may be at fault.

[dawnporter]

but they did not say there were not involved in the execution of the warrant .

 

 

Then how come the police have no copy-on file, of the warrant they ''helped execute''..as laid out in MHA?

[dawnporter]

The police can only act if an order has been made and must act if requested to do so.

I is those applying for such orders who may be at fault.

 

The above is correct as per the MHA, and the police are meant to have a signed copy of the warrant on file-AND the original should be returned to the Courts. Thus the reason 135 warrants are 4 copies in one, one for the patient, one for the hospital, and one for the police, one for the Courts.

 

But we have only one copy of the warrant used to take her into hospital, which is the one she managed to retain for 7weeks.

 

Nothing in her hospital file.

Police do not have a copy.

Courts only have records of a different type of MH warrant.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

The above is correct as per the MHA, and the police are meant to have a signed copy of the warrant on file-AND the original should be returned to the Courts. Thus the reason 135 warrants are 4 copies in one, one for the patient, one for the hospital, and one for the police, one for the Courts.

 

But we have only one copy of the warrant used to take her into hospital, which is the one she managed to retain for 7weeks.

 

Nothing in her hospital file.

Police do not have a copy.

Courts only have records of a different type of MH warrant.

 

 

 

For what reason was the order issued, the "patient be a danger t herself and others" for example?

[mikeymack2002]

A Subject access request to the trust/social worker team may provide the information you require, obtaining full medical records is easy and the only draw back is they can be selective in the information they provide.

 

 

A Court order will be the route for this information and then they MUST comply in full, but then again the information may have to go to a 3rd party that that can verify this information. A SAR can be of use but you may not still get the full story but the 3rd party WILL.

 

 

The information contained in the disclosure could have a detrimental effect on the patient. Like I have said already you really need to get a team that is qualified in this field it is a minefield as you can clearly see.

[dawnporter]

For what reason was the order issued, the "patient be a danger t herself and others" for example?

 

Social worker states: ''Ms X has been telling people around her neighborhood that someone is coming to attack her at night...Miss X believes she is a victim of domestic violence, she has been seen wearing very little clothes around her neighborhood, Miss X also had a telephone conversation with sister wherein she called sister a %$&.''

 

She called the police once when she heard someone banging on back her back door- at 3am in the morning. Police did not show up till the next afternoon to take a statement.

 

No documented complaints, made to police about her ''wearing very little clothes around her neighborhood'', and it was Summer time.

 

She says her divorce was very nasty, and she accused the ex Husband of domestic violence in the past. Ex Husband lives 5min away from where the Council placed her.

Edited July 19, 2014 by dawnporter

[dawnporter]

A Subject access request to the trust/social worker team may provide the information you require, obtaining full medical records is easy and the only draw back is they can be selective in the information they provide.

 

 

A Court order will be the route for this information and then they MUST comply in full, but then again the information may have to go to a 3rd party that that can verify this information. A SAR can be of use but you may not still get the full story but the 3rd party WILL.

 

 

The information contained in the disclosure could have a detrimental effect on the patient. Like I have said already you really need to get a team that is qualified in this field it is a minefield as you can clearly see.

 

You don't need a Court order to get information about yourself held by a public body. ICO took care of that when the Court clerk kept stalling re: releasing information on what kind of 135 warrant was on record.

 

They can make up anything they want in ones medical file...I am more interested as to why the Hospital has stated there is NO RECORD of a 135 warrant in her file.

 

Might be ''mine field'' for you, and most- but not for me...As i have said, it is well known fact that Solicitors shy away from MH cases. Even the Solicitors being paid by legal aid to represent her while in Hospital, gave her the wrong advice...They said:

 

''Even though the warrant used to bring you in is invalid''...the Section papers are in order,thus they have a legal right to hold you''.

 

What? LOL.... This Case law says different.....R (Sessay) V South London and Mausely NHS Trusthttp://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/R_(Sessay)_v_South_London_and_Maudsley_NHS_Foundation_Trust_(2011)_EWHC_2617_(QB)

 

If you don't know your rights, then you have none people....

[mikeymack2002]

Sadly to say this is not a minefield for me, if there is no warrant to hold your friend then remove the patient its that simple. like I have said you need specialist help

 

 

Take the advice or don't that is up to you.

 

 

If the Warrant is invalid apply to the Courts to have it reviewed. That is very easy to do....

 

 

I am not trying to belittle you in any way shape or form, you are trying to do the right thing by your friend that is commendable, but if there is an issue with the Warrant then have it looked into.

[dawnporter]

Sadly to say this is not a minefield for me, if there is no warrant to hold your friend then remove the patient its that simple. like I have said you need specialist help

 

 

Take the advice or don't that is up to you.

 

 

If the Warrant is invalid apply to the Courts to have it reviewed. That is very easy to do....

 

 

I am not trying to belittle you in any way shape or form, you are trying to do the right thing by your friend that is commendable, but if there is an issue with the Warrant then have it looked into.

 

This is an historical matter, she was held for 7weeks, then discharged before she could face the MH Tribunal. I have already said the only warrant the Courts have her in HER name, taken out by the Social worker- on the date she was sectioned is a 135(2) MH warrant.

 

However Social worker gave her a copy of a 135(1)warrant, with no name and a slightly incorrect address...she cooperated with them, as they where in her HOUSE. When she got to hospital, she asked over and over again to see the original warrant but hospital said it was lost.

 

The above is unacceptable and it is against standards of the MHA...one does not need a ''Specialist'' to understand this.

 

She told hospital management her detention was unlawful in writing and she wanted to be let out, but was ignored.

 

I got involve in the situation a month after she was discharged.

 

This is when i started applying for the various documents, and i uncovered all the inconsistencies...

 

This event occurred last Sept, can't find a Barrister or Solicitor to represent- and Human rights cases have a year time limit.

 

The only thing working against her, is that her family have essentially abandoned her. No one worked to get her released while she was being detained.

 

Thus the authorities felt they had the 'carte blanche' to do whatever they want.

 

And you can't belittle me btw..

[steampowered]

It seems to me that you are adopting a scatter-gun approach of complaining to everyone you can think of - the police, the social worker, the hospital, the housing association, the court clerk, the ICO. Its understandable that you are trying everything but I think you need to focus your efforts in areas where you are most likely to get results.

 

I don't think the police would be liable if they were only executing a warrant which specifically authorised them to take the course of action they took. It is not an option for the police to second-guess a warrant issued by the court. I also don't think the housing association would be liable for letting the police do this. When presented with a valid warrant the housing association didn't have any option but to let the police in.

 

I don't think your argument about this being called a 'police warrant' has any relevance, I agree that 'police warrant' might not be the technically correct name but that is basically what it is, and it is unsurprising if someone called it that.

 

I think you might be better off focusing on a potential claim against the health service/social services, if a warrant was applied for with no good reason. It seems to me that the health service/social services would be the correct defendant.

 

Why are no solicitors interested? I don't think it is true to say that solicitors won't take on MH cases. But I do imagine solicitors would want to speak to the person who would be their actual client, your friend, rather than to you. Taking instructions from someone who is not the client raises many sticky professional conduct issues. Similarly, solicitors are not charities, so if your friend cannot afford to pay then she needs to apply for legal aid.

[dawnporter]

It seems to me that you are adopting a scatter-gun approach of complaining to everyone you can think of - the police, the social worker, the hospital, the housing association, the court clerk, the ICO. Its understandable that you are trying everything but I think you need to focus your efforts in areas where you are most likely to get results.

 

I don't think the police would be liable if they were only executing a warrant which specifically authorised them to take the course of action they took. It is not an option for the police to second-guess a warrant issued by the court. I also don't think the housing association would be liable for letting the police do this. When presented with a valid warrant the housing association didn't have any option but to let the police in.

 

I don't think your argument about this being called a 'police warrant' has any relevance, I agree that 'police warrant' might not be the technically correct name but that is basically what it is, and it is unsurprising if someone called it that.

 

I think you might be better off focusing on a potential claim against the health service/social services, if a warrant was applied for with no good reason. It seems to me that the health service/social services would be the correct defendant.

 

Why are no solicitors interested? I don't think it is true to say that solicitors won't take on MH cases. But I do imagine solicitors would want to speak to the person who would be their actual client, your friend, rather than to you. Taking instructions from someone who is not the client raises many sticky professional conduct issues. Similarly, solicitors are not charities, so if your friend cannot afford to pay then she needs to apply for legal aid.

 

Thanks...But i never said the case was against the police...and social worker works for the Trust. Evidence is needed to prove a hold was not legal..So if no one wants to talk i.e housing association..police etc..you file a complaint with relevant governing bodies to get official statements..

 

The aforementioned entities- enabled a social worker with a BUNK warrant to gain access and transport this person into hospital.

 

1+1=2

 

I guess no one has the answer pertaining to my original question?..

 

Re :Solicitors... This is what i have been told off the record..and i never said i spoke to them on her behalf, and we know about the legal aid option.

 

If you 'execute' a warrant then you need to have a copy of said warrant on file...

 

As per the same MHA they used to gain access to a private citizen's accommodations.

 

 

LOL.

[dawnporter]

It seems to me that you are adopting a scatter-gun approach of complaining to everyone you can think of - the police, the social worker, the hospital, the housing association, the court clerk, the ICO. Its understandable that you are trying everything but I think you need to focus your efforts in areas where you are most likely to get results.

 

 

 

I am not trying to be rude and get banned on here or whatever...But it seem folks aren't reading my posts before commenting...firstly you don't complaint to the ICO because you feel someone stole your animal crackers.....You go the the ICO when a Public Body is refusing to release your records..

 

Court clerk kept giving excuses for 4months re: sending a copy of the type of warrant filed..

 

I stated this clearly..

 

The Hospital responsible for holding her for 7weeks against her will should not be immune from answering questions...

 

the Social worker works under a License..

 

And the Lawsuit is against the Trust, and only the Trust...for now...

 

I have made this quite clear in several different posts.

[steampowered]

I have made this quite clear in several different posts.

I've re-read the topic several times and I'm afraid I don't see anything which makes it clear that you understood your lawsuit was against the trust and (probably) not against the police. Anyway, leaving that aside, its good you realise this.

[fletch70]

I am truly confused after having read S135 and S136.

 

Doesn't S135 allow a police officer to force entry ?

 

S135(2) doesn't seem to apply solely to people who have gone AWOL contrary to what you suggest in post 7. It does mention the words take or retake which I would think applies to both

 

These warrants only allow for 72 hrs detention and not 7 weeks?

 

Can I ask but are you fully familiar with the British legal system , I only ask because you keep referring to this country which suggests you may not be.

 

Like others I think focus and expert advice is needed. If your claim is a breach of HR then maybe it is a HR lawyer you need not a mental health laywer

[dawnporter]

I am truly confused after having read S135 and S136.

 

Doesn't S135 allow a police officer to force entry ?

 

S135(2) doesn't seem to apply solely to people who have gone AWOL contrary to what you suggest in post 7. It does mention the words take or retake which I would think applies to both

 

These warrants only allow for 72 hrs detention and not 7 weeks?

 

Can I ask but are you fully familiar with the British legal system , I only ask because you keep referring to this country which suggests you may not be.

 

Like others I think focus and expert advice is needed. If your claim is a breach of HR then maybe it is a HR lawyer you need not a mental health laywer

 

1) This matter does not pertain to a 136..police powers...never said it did.

 

2) 135 can allow police forced entry..but like i keep saying over an over again ..police have denied taking out a 135 (1). LOL

 

3) language on the 135 (2)states "patient"..this implies the person is already in hosp.

 

4) 135 (1) is what is used gain access, and transport persons so doctors can do a mental health assessment. However she claims SW and docs assessd her and sectioned her in the house,

 

5) Law says if a 135 warrant is invalid ...then the section is unlawful.

 

6) It does not matter where i am from, I work in the nursing field, and i can read English..

 

Thank you for the lawyer susgestions..

 

So do you have a general idea pertaining to my original question?

[fletch70]

I can not give you any opinion on the possible amount of damages as there are far too many variables

 

I do not doubt you can read English but the legal system is hard enough to understand for a reasonably well educated native english speaker let alone someone for who English is not a first language or even say someone who speaks American style English

 

I have to disagree that Patient does not suggest in any way that the person is already an inpatient

 

I know the MHA has been altered many times with both parliamentary time and I suspect court rulings but it certainly used to be the case that the necessary people could section you from home

 

You really need to get the notes that include the time when the decision to detain for more than an emergency was made but more than that I think you need someone who can be impartial. I hate to say this but depending on the reasons for your suspension you may be classed as a less than convincing witness

 

Is everything you know about what happened, what you have been told or what you witnessed . An example may be where you talked about her wearing little clothing, could that have been off down the st in her nighty or just wearing a paid of slippers.

 

Finally can I ask if you have read S135? The reason I ask is that it defines who should be there which might account for the reason your friend thinks she was sectioned there and also removes the argument about incorrect name.

 

I am not trying to say that the detention was lawful or unlawful, just raising questions that do need addressing because without those answers you can not prove anything

[fletch70]

Hi

The link for the case law doesn't work, any chance of putting it up again

What level of court hearing was this?

[dawnporter]

Hi

The link for the case law doesn't work, any chance of putting it up again

What level of court hearing was this?

 

 

Ok will do when i get to a comp..... i am on my mobile...the person sectioned won her case..

[dawnporter]

I can not give you any opinion on the possible amount of damages as there are far too many variables

 

I do not doubt you can read English but the legal system is hard enough to understand for a reasonably well educated native english speaker let alone someone for who English is not a first language or even say someone who speaks American style English

 

I have to disagree that Patient does not suggest in any way that the person is already an inpatient

 

I know the MHA has been altered many times with both parliamentary time and I suspect court rulings but it certainly used to be the case that the necessary people could section you from home

 

You really need to get the notes that include the time when the decision to detain for more than an emergency was made but more than that I think you need someone who can be impartial. I hate to say this but depending on the reasons for your suspension you may be classed as a less than convincing witness

 

Is everything you know about what happened, what you have been told or what you witnessed . An example may be where you talked about her wearing little clothing, could that have been off down the st in her nighty or just wearing a paid of slippers.

 

Finally can I ask if you have read S135? The reason I ask is that it defines who should be there which might account for the reason your friend thinks she was sectioned there and also removes the argument about incorrect name.

 

I am not trying to say that the detention was lawful or unlawful, just raising questions that do need addressing because without those answers you can not prove anything

 

I doesn't matter what you disagree with the law is quite clear...You don't seem to understand that power of 135(1)(2) gives authorities powers to take away the Human Rights of Citizens in their own home....The authors of the MHA of course know this..thus they set very CLEAR protocols to follow when this power is being used by Police, SW, Hospitals, and even the Justice of the peace who signs the warrant...

 

You keep going around in circles...i never i said i was witness...and you are speculating re: if she had on slippers vs nighties.. I was not there and neither were you...

 

All I know there is no WRITTEN official complaint pertaining to this accusation, just the WORDS of a SW-whom she never met prior to her showing up with 135 warrant...

 

The MHA says social worker must have some kind of substantiated proof to back up their assessments...

 

The police powers under the MHA is completely different however..but they are staying out of the matter.

 

Furthermore there is NO record of any type of 135 warrant in her hospital record..nor do doctors state in thier notes, what kind of warrant was used when she came in hospital.

 

So if i was a witness, what does my suspension have to do with the authorities not having the correct paper work -which shows how this person was taken into hospital?

 

jeepers creepers..

 

Caselaw...R (Sessay) v South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (2011) EWHC 2617 (QB)

 

I am highlighting the paragraph below to show the Law says, Hospitals, police, can't just switch the type of MHA powers they are activating to hold a person...even if the person is brought in by police...

 

The Claimant according to nursing and doctors ''was showing signs of psychotic illness''...

 

Personally i don't believe them...as i have plenty experience with NHS staff- and i know they can LIE like a RUG LOL..However the point i am making is that she still won (even though they claimed to have witnessed her ''psychosis) due to the hospital and police getting wrong- the paper work and the MHA powers used to bring her in...

 

 

Further in our view the Trust has failed to establish lawful justification for the detention. The Trust recorded that the Claimant was "brought in on a Section 5(6)", that being a reference to ss.5 and 6 MCA. In fact as the Second Defendant now accepts ss.5 and 6 MCA "do not confer on police officers authority to remove persons to hospital or other places of safety for the purposes set out in sections 135 and 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983" (see para 4 above). It is clear from the actions of the Trust members of staff that they understood that the Claimant was being detained in the suite under s.136 MHA. As a matter of law that was not correct. That being so there was no lawful justification for the Claimant's detention. The fact that the Trust may lawfully have detained the Claimant under ss.2 and 4 MHA does not assist the Trust, having detained the Claimant unlawfully under other powers.

 

http://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/R_(Sessay)_v_South_London_and_Maudsley_NHS_Foundation_Trust_(2011)_EWHC_2617_(QB)

[dawnporter]

Hi

The link for the case law doesn't work, any chance of putting it up again

What level of court hearing was this?

 

Link keeps acting funny... ..in any case google the case and see for yourself...and it was a Judicial review..

[fletch70]

I do fully understand what s gong on

You are claiming that your friend was unlawfully detained in breach of the ECHR because the warrant for her detention was not prepared and executed correctly.

Your claim that it was not executed correctly may be correct but what is slightly confusing is this evidence that is being used to show she was unfit to be by herself. There is the evidence of her sister, evidence of neighbours , how did this come about . You are saying that the social worker presented this to the magistrate?

 

Yes of course I was speculating about the state of undress but so were you, all I said was maybe

If the procedures were followed by the magistrate I would think you would need to show some malicious intent on behalf of others (the sister or the neighbours)

 

What I was saying about your suspension, and I don't care what it was for, is that if you are involved in this someone might suggest you were out to get your own back on the NHS so that you could not be credible

 

I was only concerned that you got all your ducks in a row before embarking on something