Alan Dransfield's Blog

15th April 2013

Case Reference Number FS50493287

Dear Mr Dransfield,

Your information request to Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council

Thank you for your correspondence of 10 April 2013 in which you make a complaint about Stockport’s decision not to release the information you requested.

Your case has been allocated to one of our Complaints Resolution teams who will contact you as soon as possible to explain how your complaint will be progressed.

The Information Commissioner’s Office is an independent public body set up to promote public access to official information. We will rule on eligible complaints from people who are unhappy with the way public authorities have handled requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

If you need to contact us about any aspect of your complaint please contact our Freedom of Information Helpline on 0303 123 1113, being sure to quote the reference number at the top of this letter.

Yours sincerely,

Jenny Sanders
Sent on behalf of
Andrew White
Group Manager
Complaints Resolution
Information Commissioner’s Office

Attn Mr Justice Charles

Upper Tribunal President

Dear Sir

Please be advised that I have received a copy of Judge Wikeley notes from the UT hearing in London on the 14th Nov 12 and in my view, these notes support my allegations of wrongdoing by Judge Wikeley.

In a letter from the Clerk to the Upper Trubunal dated 12/4/13 which, I received today along with the handwritten notes, the clerk, Kevin MacNamara, claims the administrative oversight of the defunct tape recorder was not discovered until I made a request for a copy of the tape, which just doesn’t add up because my request for the tape was made weeks AFTER Judge Wikeley Final Decision Notice of the 28th Jan.

Judge Wikeley would now have the World believe, he made his final Decision Notice (DN) based only on his handwritten notes. Quite frankly, I think that is hogwash…….

No way on God’s earth did Judge Wikeley make his 22 page DN based on his hand written notes only and this is most evident when cross referencing Judge Wikeley’s notes and his Final Decision Notice.

My hearing was part of a Triple Test Case Hearing. Hence, am I to assume that the audio recorder malfunctioned only for my hearing, or was it unavailable for all three Cases? I think you need to establish that fact!

I would suggest/recommend you obtain a copy of Judge Wikeley’s handwritten notes before you commence your investigation into my allegations of wrongdoing by Judge Wikeley.

The most important question at my hearing was: WHY DID THE ICO & DCC NOT OBEY A COURT ORDER TO PRODUCE THE 13 GHOST DOCUMENTS. I certainly asked that question and so did Judge Wikeley, but there is no reference to that in his notes. How convenient is that?

It should also be noted that in the 1st Test Case hearing Ainslie V Dorset County Council Judge Wikeley had sight of the 1/2 doz FOIA requests from Mr Ainslie. Hence, why did he not offer me the same courtesy, especially after he had issued a Court Order to the ICO&DCC to produce the Ghost Documents. Those GHOST DOCUMENTS were paramount to the context and history which the Judge relied upon.

What position is your horse and cart in at the moment Sir? Last time we corresponded, it was the cart before the horse, which I urge you to rearrange asap and to investigate the conduct of Judge Wikeley as a matter of urgency owing to the Rogue GIA/3037 /2011 decision..

I would like you to put questions to Judge Wikely:-

1. Did you issue a Court Order to the DCC & ICO to produce the 13 Ghost Documents?

2. What actions did you take, if any, when the DCC & ICO disobeyed your Court Order?

3. Did you not think it prudent of you to see these 13 Ghost Documents before making a Context & History decision?

……………..

Notwithstanding the veracity of my allegations, I believe the gravity of my claims requires your office to act and to act quickly.

With thanks

Alan M Dransfield

Attn Richard Bailey ICO Solicitor

Dear Sir

Please find the DCC response regarding Lightning Protection for the Redhayes Bridge dated 30Aug2011, and I wish to add this document to the Final Bundle for my 3rd Retrial Hearing in July. This is relevant to my case because the Redhayes Bridge was designed and built under the New Lightning Standards BS/EN 62305/2008 and come under the direct remit of the DCC.

It is also most relevant to my case, as it clearly shows a pattern of systemic failures by the DCC regarding Lightning Protection.

It beggars belief the DCC omitted a Lightning Risk Assessment (LRA) and failed to install a Lightning Protection System (LPS) on this structure. This attached document is, in my view, prima facie evidence the DCC have failed their duty of care to provide adequate LPS AND LRA on a public structure..

It is also prima facie evidence the DCC have failed their legal obligation under Section 51 of he Local Government Act.

The Worse Case Scenario (WCS) on on this Bridge is it that is takes a direct hit from lightning, which destroys the foundations and causes the bridge to collapse in the rush hour of the M5 underneath.

It may sound horrific but that’s what WCS were intended for!

I am of the opinion that the DCC bridge engineers have failed their duty of care to consider lightning on the Redhayes Bridge, which is used by thousands of cyclists and pedestrians each year. Only 500 metres away the Exeter Chief Pedestrian Bridge has been provided with LPS but no LRA. Hence, it beggars belief the Redhayes Bridge was not even considered for LPS & LRA covered by the BS/EN 62305/08.

I suggest/recommend that an urgent revision of both the LPS and LRA for Redhayes Bridge is carried out as a matter of urgency. By virtue of this email, I am requesting my MP, Ben Bradshaw, to bring this matter to the attention of the HSE. I would contact them myself but, as all parties are aware, I am under a lifetime email ban from the HSE.

You are also aware this particular bridge falls into a suicide hotspot which has also not been addressed by the DCC. This Bridge is also within spitting distance of Exeter International Airport and has not been provisioned with any Aviation Warning Lights.

In short, Redhayes Bridge is a H&S timebomb and a catastrophe waiting to happen.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield