Alan Dransfield's Blog

Dear
Rachael

Thank
you for your response but I do not accept your comments that my FOIA request
requires further time. My request is straightforward and benign and I consider
you are plotting delaying and frustration tactics.

With
thanks

Alan
M Dransfield

——–

On 3 Aug 2015, at 15:02, foi <foi@londonlegacy.co.uk>
wrote:

Dear
Mr Dransfield

FREEDOM
OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 – REQUEST

The
Freedom of Information Act obliges us to respond to requests promptly and no
later than 20 working days after receiving your request. However, when a
qualified exemption applies to the information and the public interest test is
engaged, the Act allows the time for response to be longer than 20 working
days, and a full response must be provided within such time as is reasonable in
all circumstances of the case.

We
do, of course, aim to make all decisions within 20 working days, including in
cases where we need to consider the public interest test. In this case,
however, we have not yet reached a decision on where the balance of the public
interest lies.

In
your case we estimate that it will take an additional 20 working days to take a
decision on where the balance of the public interest lies. Therefore, we plan
to let you have a response by 3 September 2015. If it appears that it
will take longer than this to reach a decision, we will keep you informed.
Obviously, if we are able to provide you with our response before this date, we
will do so.

The
exemption that applies in relation to your request and that requires the extra
time in order to consider the public interest is: s.31(1) (a) – Law
Enforcement. Information which is not exempt information by virtue of
section 30 is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or
would be likely to, prejudice—(a)the prevention or detection of crime,

We will keep you informed of our progress and provide you with our
response to your request as soon as we are able.

Yours
sincerely

Rachael
————————-

From: alan dransfield [mailto:alanmdransfield@gmail.com]
Sent: 09 July 2015 06:32
To: foi
Cc: Richard Bailey; christopher.graham@ico.org.uk;
John BERCOW; Mayor of London
Subject: PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE FOR THE OLYMPIC STADIUM

London Legacy Authority.

Dear Sirs

Under protection of the FOIA 2000 ,please provide me with
the following information for the Queen Elizabeth Sports Stadium in London:

1.A copy of your Public Liability Insurance
Certificate

2.A copy of the COMPLETION CERTIFICATE.

3.A copy of the Sports Stadium Safety Certificate from
Newham Council..

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

This communication and the information it contains is intended for the
addressee only. It may be confidential, legally privileged and protected by
law. Unauthorised use, copying or disclosure of any of it may be unlawful. If
you have received this communication in error, please contact me immediately by
email or telephone and then delete the e-mail and its attachments from your
system. This email and any attachments have been scanned for viruses by
Symantec and on leaving the London Legacy Development Corporation they were
virus free. No liability will be incurred for direct, special or indirect or
consequential damages arising from alteration of the contents of this message
by a third party or as a result of any virus contained within it or attached to
it. The London Legacy Development Corporation may monitor traffic data. For
enquiries please call 020 3288 1800.
London Legacy Development Corporation, Level 10, 1 Stratford Place, Montfichet
Road, London, E20 1EJ.

www.queenelizabetholympicpark.co.uk

______________________________________________________________________

Email sent – 31/07/15 16.59

Dear
Sirs

Please
review your decision because I do not accept your statement that the Olympic
Stadium is compliant with the BS/ EN62305/2008.

The
material being used is non conductive, ie it is made of PVC.

I
look forward to your review .

Please
be mindful that I am on record that HM the Queen has been placed in
mortal danger should she visit this Stadium.

With
thanks

Alan M Dransfield

Email sent – 02/08/15 at 08.21

Attn the Mayor of London Mr Boris Johnson. and the London
Legacy Authority(LLA)

Dear Sirs

Let’s not beat about the bush here, I claim the the London
Olympic Stadium is unsafe and unfit for purpose owing to fraud by the Balfour
Beatty Group (BBG) and in particular the Lightning Protection.

Please see the attached Lightning Risk Assessment which is
irrefutable evidence the new stadium is non-compliant with BS/EN62305/2008.

Please refer to the main four (4) Lightning Protection
criteria on page 1 of 10 and you will clearly see that 3 of the 4 criteria have
been omitted.

Moreover and more importantly, please see the date of this
so called Risk Assessment. It is dated 24th April this year, which quite frankly
beggars belief as the LRA should be conducted at Design Phase.

sIn essence, this attached documents is irrefutable evidence
the new Stadium is unsafe and unfit for purpose owing to gross criminal
negligence by the BBG and the LLA.

I would strongly recommend and suggest this stadium is
closed down and prevented from public use until a FULL LIGHTNING RISK
ASSESSMENT has been carried out.

I would be most grateful if the Mayor of London will forward
this email and attachment to the Royal Household Security Team because I
maintain this attached document is irrefutable evidence the Queen and other
Royals have been placed in mortal danger

For you information, action and files

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

Email sent – 30/07/15 07.51

Attn Mr Bobby Brown

Balfour Beatty National Safety Manager

Dear Mr Brown

I put you on notice that your negligence at the Olympic
Stadium will place HM The Queen and other royals in mortal danger owing
to the fact the Olympic Stadium is devoid of lightning protection as required
by BS/EN 62305/2008.

I also put you on notice your negligence and incompetence
holds life threatening dangers to the general public attending the Exeter
Chiefs Rugby Ground and Pedestrian Bridge.

For your information, action and files.

Yours etc

Alan M Dransfield

Email sent = 20/07/15 06.08

HM Royal Household Security Chief

St. James’s Palace
London SW1A 1BS

Dear
Sirs

I
would be most grateful if your would forward this message to HM Security Chief,
as I fervently believe HM the Queen and other members of the Royal Family have
been placed in mortal danger by the failure to provision the Olympic Stadium
and the Houses of Parliament with the minimum Lightning Protection Safeguards.

I
also believe that a recent Court of Appeal decision C3/2013/1855 Dransfield v
ICO and Devon County Council has compromised the safety of the Royal Family.

The
Information Commissioner, Mr Christopher Graham, has knowingly and flagrantly
compromised the safety of the Royal Family. I would like the opportunity
to meet with HM Security Chief to discuss these matters in specific detail
please.

The
London Legacy and the Mayor of London, Mr Boris Johnson, have failed their
duty of care to protect the Royal Household with specific failings of
Lightning Protection.

John
Bercow, the Speaker of the House, is fully aware of such dangers and has chosen
to turn a blind eye. Ditto for my MP Mr Ben Bradshaw.

It
is my duty as a loyal citizen of the Queen to report such matters.

With
thanks

Yours
sincerely

Alan
M Dransfield.

Email sent – 04 April 2015 06:29

Dear Mr Bradshaw

Please see the attached report from the Devon County Council regarding weather impact and, in
particular, I ask you to do a search of the document ref lightning.

The report suggests that the DCC is fully aware of the impact and dangers of thunderstorms and lightning strikes, which over the last decade, have become
a serious hazard.

It would therefore be apparent to any fair minded person that the DCC/ECC
would take lightning very seriously and indeed treat it as a life threatening danger.

As you are aware, the DCC does not take lightning seriously, ditto for the
City Council, RDE -NH Trust, John Lewis, Exeter Uni, Exeter Chiefs, Devon Fire
Authority etc.

For your information,action and files.

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

Email sent – 09 March 2015 07:06

Dear Mr Bradshaw

I have reason to believe the Devon County Council may possibly have fraudulently
approved the Sports Ground Safety Certificate (SGSC) for the Exeter Chiefs
Rugby Stadium. It is an offence for a public authority to issue a Sports Ground
Safety Licence if they know the said stadium is unsafe.

As you are aware, a SGSC must be produced by the Local Authority for any
sports stadium with a capacity of 10,000 people or more.

A simple ocular inspection of the Exeter Chiefs Rugby Stadium will confirm
the Stadium is unsafe and unfit for purpose owing to numerous health and safety violations which include but not limited to:-

1. Failure to provide Lightning Protection Systems in accordance with the
BS/EN 62305/2008 on original stadium and recent upgraded stadium. Applicable to all parts of the ground. The biggest danger related to
Lightning is overflash strikes, which have not been
considered at design or construction phase.

2. Various trip hazards at ground level.

3. Various protruding and sharp objects from stadium fixings.

4. Earthing and grounding failures.

5. Inadequate toilet and washing facilities.

As you are aware, the adjacent pedestrian Bbidge is subject to a Court of
Appeal ruling.

May I suggest you write to the DCC and the Rugby Club on this matter. You
might wish to ask the Sports Ground Stadium Authority why they appear to have
ignored this particular stadium.

As you are aware, the Exeter Chiefs Rugby Stadium is scheduled to be used
later this year for the Rugby World Cup. The worst case scenario (WCS) at both the pedestrian bridge and the stadium is multiple deaths or serious injuries
from lightning overflash.

WCS was not considered at either design or construction phase of this
stadium.

For your information, action and files.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

Email sent – 09 March 2015 07:43

London Legacy Authority

Dear Sirs

Under protection of the FOIA 2000, please provide me with copies of the
following:-

1. An approved copy of the Lightning Risk Assessment for design phase of
the refurbishment project.

2.Lightning Protection Test results for the previous two years before your
remit for both the Stadium and the Aqua Centre.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield