Alan Dransfield's Blog

Attn Mr Bobby Brown

Balfour Beatty Group National Manager for Health & Safety(?!)

Dear Mr Brown

As you can see Miss Vicki Skeene is still ignoring my emails. Miss Skeene is the Balfour Beatty Group HR Manager nationwide, and she will surely claim ignorance on these H&S matters which your are also aware of.

My advice to you is keep your CV up to date.

Alan M Dransfield

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Skene, Vikki vikki.skene@balfourbeatty.com
Date: Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 12:41 AM
Subject: Email block
To: alan dransfield

As previously advised your emails to this address are blocked and will not be read or forwarded.

Email sent – 05 November 2014 01:48

Balfour Beatty plc

130 Wilton Road, London

SW1V 1LQ

For the Attn of the CEO and the Fraud Investigation Officers

Dear Sirs

I would be most grateful if you would elevate this letter to your CEO and the Balfour Beatty Group Fraud Investigation Manager, as I wish to report serious crimes within the Balfour Beatty Group.

In particular, I wish to report serious crimes on the Olympic Village Design and Construction and in particular the Queen Elizabeth Stadium which is proposed to be used for next years Rugby Finals and the Exeter Chiefs Rugby Stadium both designed and built by the BBG.

Both of these sports stadiums are operating in a legal void owing to the fact they have not been provisioned with adequate lightning protection measures, inter alia .

I would be most grateful for a full list of the BBG Board of Executives and None Executive Directors of the BBG.

Please also provide me with a contact name and email address for the BBG Head Lawyer.

For specific details of my allegations please contact Miss Vikki Skeene your HR Manager in Glasgow and your National H&S Manager Mr Bobby Brown.

Further specific details can be obtained from your S/W Director Mr Andy Macadam in Exeter.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

Email sent – 05 November 2014 03:00

Dear Mr Bradshaw

I really don’t think that you are setting a very good example for a paperless office are you? You insist on sending out hard copy replies to your constituents, which quite frankly beggars belief from a former Environmental Minister

I was under the opinion that Government Offices were supposed to operate a paperless office. It’s fairly obvious that these guidelines have not filtered down to the ICO/FTT or UT Courts Yyet.

Drawbacks with hard copy records are:-

1.Environmental Impact.

2.Fire hazards ref paper records.

3.Large storage area required.

4. Expensive storage cabinets etc required

5. Time and expense searching hard copies

6. Expense of post and package and stationary

7.More expense option

Quite frankly Mr Bradshaw it beggars belief that a large number of Government and public authorities are still using the antiquated hard copy paperworks system.

What is the Shadow Government view on paperless offices please?

I would be most grateful if you would cease from sending me hard copy replies to my letters, as it disturbs my environmental conscience.

I am trying to operate a paperless office but my MP insists on sending hard copies of correspondence, ditto for the ICO/FTT and UT.

I can’t imagine how much the Devon County Council costs are for their hard copy paper documents system. Ditto for the ICO

Can you advise me when your office is expected to achieve a paperless office please?

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

Email sent – 17 November 2014 15:25

Justice Dept Select Committee

Dear Sir

Please see the attached FOI decision which indicates the Vexatious decisions are spreading like cancer.

Please bring this matter to the attention of the Justice Select Committee.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

Email sent – 18 November 2014 16:53

Dear Mr Bradshaw

Please see the following response ref the Exeter Chiefs Rugby Grounds.

Grateful for the needful

With thanks

Alan M Dransfield

From: Lou Elliston
Date: 18 November 2014 04:41:22 GMT-6
To: Alan M dransfield
Subject: RE: Exeter Chiefs Rugby Ground Safety

Dear Mr Dransfield

I have no knowledge of the Exeter Chiefs stadium. It is outside the area of my responsibility. I suggest you address your question to the local authority of the area in which it is situated.

Regards
Lou Elliston

From: Alan M dransfield
Sent: 13 November 2014 18:10
To: Lou Elliston
Cc: BRADSHAW Ben; Fiona Miller miller
Subject: Exeter Chiefs Rugby Ground Safety

Dear Lou
You have confirmed to me that the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Stadium will be safe for next year’s Rugby World Cup Finals but you have not included the subject title.

Can you please confirm the Lightning Protection system at the Exeter Chiefs Stadium is fully compliant to relevant Lightening Standards.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield

Monday, December 01, 2014 7:08 AM

Subject: Complaint against Upper Tribunal Judge SM Wright

Mr Justice Charles

Upper Tribunal President

Dear Sir

I wish to make a complaint of misconduct against Judge SM Wright in the manner he has handled a recent UT Case and his subsequent final decision notice..

In particular, I refer to the UT hearing in London on the 16th Oct 2014 ref GIA/1642/2014 Dransfield v the ICO and House of Lords.

Judge SM Wright upheld the ICO decision, “DO NOT HOLD THE SOUGHT AFTER DATA”.

No person applying a right and proper mind could have reached such a decision because the House of Lords (HoL) have a legal obligation to hold the sought after data, i.e. Lightning Risk Assessment (LRA) for the Westminster Parliament Premises.

As you are aware, I have a long running complaint against another UT Judge,i.e Judge Wikeley ref GIA/3037/2011 Dransfield v ICO &Devon County County Council, which you have refused to investigate pending the Court of Appeal Hearing in London on the 27/28th Jan 2015.

I accept that the GIA/1642/2014 is not VEXATIOUS related but it would appear the Upper Tribunal are determined to obstruct Justice in cases involving Dransfield.

Judge Wright claims in his decision notice that it is NOT the duty of the FTT/ICO or the UT to investigate if the HoL “SHOULD” hold the sought after data.

It is inconceivable that a Upper Tribunal Judge would not investigate the Legal Obligation of the Public Authority to HOLD the sought after data.

Therefore, the emphasis of my complaint is Judge SM Wright MINDSET ref “SHOULD HOLD” definition.

In all probability, the House of Lords have a legal obligation under UK and EU Laws to hold the sought after data and the ICO/FTT and the UT were very wrong to not investigate this matter. Indeed, it is not a question of fact if they should hold the Lightning Risk Assessment, as it is well documented in Statutory Law.

Any right minded person would investigate if the House of Lords held a legal remit to hold the Lightning Risk Assessment.

Judge SM Wright was very wrong to dismiss my appeal based on the fact the HoL claimed they did not hold the LRA documents.

My allegations of wrongdoing falls under the UT Rules and Procedures related to “Judicial Misconduct ie Rule 34(b).

There is evidence to support my claims the FTT and the UT are part of a wider conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and to circumvent the FOIA 2000.

At this juncture, there are two UT decisions which debar the general public access to the FOIA 2000.

A1. The GIA/3037/2011 Dransfield v ICO &DCC. (Vexatious).

A2. The GIA/1642/2014 Dransfield v ICO& House of Lords.( Do not hold)

….I request the Upper Tribunal to add my complaint against Judge SM Wright to my complaint against Judge Wikeley.

…It should be noted that Judge Wright has subsequently refused permission for me my leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal.

Please be informed that I now intend to appeal Judge Wrights GIA/1642/2014 decision to the Court of Appeal.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield.

Email sent – 02 December 2014 09:11

Dear Mr Bradshaw

I am currently preparing a case for the European Court of Human Rights and was horrified to learn they only accept hard copy application forms.

No wonder the EU are spending billions of Euros of taxpayers’ money if they don’t have a basic paperless office and are solely reliant upon hard copy files. For God’s sake man, we are in the 21st Century, not the 17th.

Please see the ECHR application form and in particular the box at the top of the page.

Please raise this matter with the appropriate oversight authorities.

With thanks

Alan M Dransfield

Email sent – 02 December 2014 09:29

Dear Mr Bradshaw

Further to my email yesterday, sent whilst travelling on National Express Coach to London, I observed a large construction site in the Heart of London with 8 Tower Cranes in Buckingham Palace Road, 4 of which were not displaying any aviation lights as required by law.

In light of the tragic incident last year (not accident) in which a helicopter crashed into an unprotected Tower Crane at St George Wharf, I would have envisaged the HSE and Local Authorities would have tightened up on such matters. Obviously not.

No doubt the HSE are still working on that incident!

I also have grave concerns for a new wind turbine recently installed within a stone’s throw of the M4 at the Basingstoke/Reading Junction and practically sitting on top of an office block.

In the event the blades of this wind turbine are detached in a storm, as is most common nationwide, the offices or the M4 could have wind turbine blade where it shouldn’t be.

Can you imagine the carnage if that blade falls onto the M4 at peak period?

I would be most grateful if you would write to the appropriate oversight authorities on these two issues please – Minister of Transport for the WT debacle and the Mayor of London for the tower crane debacle.

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield