This blog is aimed at shaming those who ignore health and safety and those who abuse the Freedom of Information Act out of laziness, corruption or to cover up incompetence.
Why the subtle change?
” 2. Law. (of legal actions) instituted without sufficient grounds and serving only to cause annoyance to the defendant.”
“LAW
denoting an action or the bringer of an action that is brought without sufficient grounds for winning, purely to cause annoyance to the defendant.
“a frivolous or vexatious litigant””
Email sent – Mon 14/03/2016 08:27
Dear Mr Bailey
Can you please advise me if the Home Office conformed to this request.
With thanks
Alan M Dransfield
https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2016/1560487/fs_50573503.pdf
Email sent – 16/03/2016 07:10
Dear Mr Bradshaw
I am sure you are aware that the EC of Human Rights
have recently overhauled their Appeal
Application system to improve their transparency, accountability and security
(TAS). Guess what? Their TAS system is still not working, as their attached letter clearly indicates.
The EC have refused my application on the sole grounds of
one missing document,i.e., The grounds of Appeal to the Supreme Court.
It is not a big issue for me to send a copy of the
Supreme Court Grounds to Appeal and the EC are wrong to destroy the whole application based upon such a small oversight i.e., zero tolerance to errors.
It is a big issue for me to re-send the whole package, but
I will jump through their silly little hoops in the interest of justice and
the saviour of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
I call upon my MP to write to the European Courts of
Human Rights and Justice and the UK MEP Justice Committee seeking reassurance
that the general public are allowed fair access to the EC of Human Rights. I am
sure you are familiar with the saying, “justice delayed is justice
denied”.
I am sure any fair minded person would agree that the EC
of Human Rights are wrong to debar application based on one missing document.
I rather suspect that Miss Lafferty, the UK Government
Gatekeeper, is lurking around the Application Registrar to debar the average Joe
Bloggs and to debar access to the Human Rights Courts.
For your information, action and files
With thanks
Yours sincerely
Alan M Dransfield
From: Alan M Dransfield
Sent: 18 March 2016 06:16
To: Richard Bailey CC: BRADSHAW Ben MP
Subject: Dransfield v ICO GIA246/2015
Dear Mr Bailey
As you are aware we are awaiting an Upper Tribunal
hearing date for
this particular case which is not connected to next
weeks First Tier Tribunal hearing.
On a separate issue, you are also aware the UT have
imposed an email ban against me
hence; would you be so kind as to ask the UP for dates to avoid for this hearing. Being mindful of the public purse costs for these hearings, don’t you think it would be cheaper
and less stressful to all if you simply provided me with the sought
after information?
With thanks
Yours sincerely
Alan M Dransfield
Email sent – Tue 01/03/2016 11:00
To: Terry.burns@santander.co.uk
Dear Sir
I refer to your undated report and the fact you have
discussed the Dransfield Case GIA/3037/2011 Dransfield v ICO in some length. I
wish to make a follow up complaint to your office ref the fact you have
debarred me from giving evidence to the current inquiry team.
In a nutshell the Vexatious Case Authority ref the
Dransfield Case is a tool designed by crooks to assist the passage of fraud and
theft of public funds and to cover up heinous sex crimes.
For your information,action and files
With thanks
Yours sincerely
Alan M Dransfield
Email sent – Wed 24/02/2016 07:48
Dear Mr Bailey
Under protection of the FOIA please provide me with the
following information.
1. Copy of each invoice from KBW for each individual
case.
For the avoidance of doubt this is a brand new request for
each individual case listed. I will concede that I have asked for other KBW
invoices for other ICO defence cases, but not the listed cases. Therefore, you
cannot rely on that old vexatious chestnut but no doubt you will try.
With thanks
Yours sincerely
Alan M Dransfield.
informationhttps://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/502812/Analysis_of_First_tier_Tribunal_decisions_on_sections_35_and_36.pdf
Dear Mr Bradshaw MP
Four (4) different police authorities have used the
Dransfield vexatious Court Authority in the last two weeks. For more info
see Information Commissioner’s Office decisions:-
1 FS 50587947 Staffs
2.FS 50605046 Herts
3.FS 50611417 Cambridge
4.FS 5060768 West Midlands
It looks as though all the plebs nationwide are jumping on the Dransfield
vexatious Bandwagon The question is
what are you going to do about and what is the Labour Party going to do?
Yours in disgust
Dransfield
