Alan Dransfield's Blog

Email sent – 01 December 2014 13:49

Dear Mr Bradshaw

I have just seen 3 tower cranes in Hammersmith which have not been provisioned with any aviationlLights.

In light of the helicopter crash last year in London, I would have envisaged the HSE and local authorities would have tightened up on such matters.

I appreciate this is outside your remit but would appreciate it if you would contact the HSE on this matter.

With thanks

Yours sincerely
Alan M Dransfield

Saturday, October 12, 2013 12:53 PM

Dear Mrs Mitchell
Local Government Ombudsman

Case ref: 13/007/192

I acknowledge and thank you for your letter dated 10th Oct 13 with your provisional decision i.e., “in light if the Ombudsman investigation, the Devon County Council have agreed to reconsider its decision not to correspond further with Mr X”

That’s jolly damn magnanimous of the Devon County Council (DCC), isn’t it?

However, it does not state if they are prepared to remove the lifetime email ban. In your fourth paragraph, it clearly states the email ban will be lifted next July. I don’t accept the email ban is lawful and that’s the first notification I have received about the ban being lifted next July.

The council claim also in para 4, my previous emails were “inappropriate and unacceptable” but they fail to give specific details, and it would appear you failed to ask for specific details.

I refute in the strongest manner your claims that the DCC actions have not caused me personal loss. The general public are (or should be) at liberty to correspond with public authorities as they see fit and my choice is via email because of the time, cost, efficiency, environmentally friendly etc. I fervently believe the DCC email ban is Draconian. I agree with you that is “unfair to set a permanent ban”; hence why has it taken the LGO five years to reach that view?

The DCC are breaching Article 10 of my human rights, but you have failed to identify that breach.

I don’t accept the DCC are treating this matter seriously as they say: “they will consider corresponding with me”

In essence, the DCC have placed me on a blacklist and are gagging me from my legal right to communicate with the local Government elected Officials.

I accept your actions are a step in the right direction, but I fervently do believe the LGO is failing their fiduciary duty of care by not laying down the law to the DCC management, whom are at best, living, in a Draconian period and, at worst, conspiring to pervert the course of justice and to circumvent the Local Government Act74 and the FOIA 200O.

I look forward to receiving a letter from the LGO stating:

1. The email ban is lifted with immediate affect

2. The communication gagging order has been lifted with immediate affect.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan Dransfield

Email sent Friday, June 21, 2013 7:27 AM
Subject: COMPLAINT AGAINST THE OLYMPIC DELIVERY AUTHORITY & LONDON LEGACY AUTHORITY

The Monitoring Officer
Greater London Authority
City Hall
The Queen’s Walk
London
SE1 2AA

Dear Sir

I wish to make an official complaint against Olympic Deliver Authority (ODA), which has been recently taken over by the London Legacy Authority (LLA) regarding the public safety of the the Olympic Stadia and Aquatic Centre.

These stadia have not been provisioned with adequate Lightning Protection Systems(LPS) and Lightning Risk Assessments (LRA) the ODA/LLA have attempted to block my access to public information, which is a breach of Section 77 of the FOIA 2000.

The ODA claim they cannot release technical data related to the Stadium LPS under the FOIA 2000 because it breaches National Security which, at best. is absurd and at worst, an attempt to pervert the course of justice, I suggest the latter. If indeed the LPS or LRA cannot be released under national security, I call for the opportunity to visit these stadia with the appropriate oversight authority for a joint ocular inspection, and I will point out the technical irregularities related to the LPS/LRA.

I draw your attention in particular to the Equipotential (touch potential) grounding and bonding of the stadia, which I maintain have been subject to wilful blindness by the designers and principal c ontractors i.e., Balfour Beatty Group (BBG). Whether or not the Olympic Village was a design and build Contract for the BBG I know not, but I do know public safety has been woefully and wilfully compromised ref the LPS & LRA.

This case is currently under review of the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights), who have already stated that LPS/LRA is of great public Interest test.

I fully appreciate the Olympic Village is due to be opened in July and I fervently believe it would be prudent of your office to investigate the LPS &LRA of the stadia as a matter of extreme urgency. Both the ODA & LLA claim the Olympic Village is compliant to the BS/EN 62305/2008 Lightning Standards, but to date have been unable to produce one single document under the FOIA 2000.

Owing to the gravity of my allegations, it behoves the ODA/LLA to produce the required LPS/LRA documents and not to hide behind national security nonsense.

For your information, action and files

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

Email sent Thursday, June 20, 2013 4:47 PM

Subject: LIFE-THREATENING DANGERS AT EXETER PUBLIC BUILDING

Attn of the Exeter Coroner

Dr Elizabeth A Earland.

Dear Madam

I refer to your letter dated 5th June 2013 in which you recommended I should contact the HSE with these matters re the subject title. I agree such matters are indeed related to the HSE, but I have turned to the your office out of frustration because I have contacted the HSE without satisfaction and they have imposed a lifetime email ban against me.

I have made repeated attempts to the HSE and the appropriate oversight authorities who refuse to take this matter seriously. Hence, I urge the Coroner’s Office to ensure a full investigation takes place.

I would also wish to advise you that my concerns ref the subject title are not isolated to Lightning Dangers, they include Legionaires’ Disease, Weils Disease, contaminated drinking water at 6 PFI schools, Fire Hazards etc.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

——————————————————————————————

Dear Mr Dransfield

I acknowledge your email dated 20th and 21st June 2013 and note what you say.

I am afraid I can do nothing further.

Yours sincerely

Dr Elizabeth A. Earland
H. M. Coroner for Exeter and Greater Devon

Devon County Council
(Room 226) County Hall
Topsham Road
Exeter
EX2 4QD

Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 7:14 AM

Subject: ABUSE OF POWER AT THE DEVON COUNTY COUNCIL

Local Government Ombudsman

Dear Madam

Please see a copy of my letter below to the Devon County Council HR Department, which is self explanatory.

I would also like you to add this letter to my current complaint against the Devon County Council.

I fervently believe the DCC have a duty of care to acknowledge such letters and their consistent failure to ignore such issues is tantamount to abuse of power and mallfeasance.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield.

Email sent – Sunday, May 19, 2013 8:18 AM

OFSTED

Whistleblowing Team Leader Mr Paul Dye

Dear Sir

Dear Sir

Please see the following news article ref the contaminated drinking water at all 6 PFI schools in Exeter. I consider this to be a major health and welfare violation which the local authority have turned a wilfull blind eye to because they have known about such issues since the schools were commissioned 7/8 years ago.

Moreover and more importantly, Ofsted have also turned a wilful blind eye to such matters.

Ofsted’s primary role as school inspector is to ensure basic welfare needs at schools are provided. Access to safe drinking water must surely be defined as a basic need.

With thanks

Alan Dransfield